Ex  Libris 
C.  K.  OGDEN 


The  Old  and  the  New  Ideal 


A  Solution  of  that  part  of  the  Social  Question 

which  pertains  to  Love,  Marriage  and 

Sexual  Intercourse. 


BY 
EMIL  F.  RUEDEBUSCH. 


SECOND    EDITION. 


Published  by  the  Author. 

MAYVILLE,  WIS.,    U.   S.   A. 

1897. 


COPYRIGHTED,  1896,    BY 

EMIL   F.  RUEDEBUSCH. 


PREFACE. 

In  March,  1895,  I  published  a  German  book, 
which  I  named  "Freie  Menschen  in  der  Liebe  und 
Ehe"  (Free  Men  and  Women  in  Love  and  Mar- 
riage.) It  was,  like  this  volume,  a  plain  and  open 
treatise  on  the  "dangerous"  subject— crude  prose 
void  of  the  embellishments  of  language  with  which 
a  literary  genius  might  adorn  the  same  truths. 
Considering  these  facts,  I  must  say  that  the  man- 
ner in  which  the  book  was  received  by  press  and 
public,  was  surprisingly  favorable.  A  large  num- 
ber of  newspapers  and  periodicals,  of  this  country 
and  Germany,  printed  nighty  appreciative  critiques; 
a  still  larger  number  of  private  correspondents 
(including  many  noted  personages)  were  even  more 
fervent  in  their  praise,  and — last  but  not  least— the 
book  found  a  very  ready  sale. 

For  the  first  attempt  of  an  author  who  does 
not  by  any  means  conceive  it  to  be  his  "inspired 
vocation"  to  write  books,  this  may  indeed  appear 
to  be  a  great  success.  But,  alas,  I  am  forced  to 
admit  that,  so  far  as  the  main  object  was  con- 


-  IV  - 

cerned,  it  was  a  complete  failure,  for  the  simple 
reason  that  it  did  not  succeed  in  making  my  mean- 
ing clear  to  the  readers.  It  was  a  sad  disappoint- 
ment when  I  became  aware  of  the  fact  that  my 
book  had  this  most  deplorable  of  all  weaknesses! 
Fortunately,  I  had  written  on  the  last  page  an 
earnest  appeal  to  all  readers  interested  in  the  sub- 
ject to  correspond  with  me  and  inform  me  of  their 
acquiescence  or  their  doubts  and  objections.  The 
numerous  and  eager  replies  to  this  request  proved 
that  I  had  at  least  created  an  interest  in  the  new 
ideas.  The  results  were  an  immense  correspond- 
ence, many  interesting  personal  acquaintances  and 
new  friends,  and  hundreds  of  eager  discussions  of 
the  subject  by  tongue  and  pen.  In  these  I  finally 
succeeded  in  making  myself  understood.  Thus,  in 
spite  of  the  general  "failure,"  the  "chosen  few"  gave 
me  an  excellent  opportunity  to  test  the  strength 
of  my  arguments,  to  estimate  the  value  of  the 
theory  in  practice  and  to  find  out  which  points 
need  closer  attention  and  clearer  elucidation,  to 
the  end  that  a  full  understanding  may  be  secured. 
After  about  nine  months  of  serious  study  I 
resolved  to  make  another  attempt  to  acquaint  the 
general  public  with  my  ideas.  When  I  wrote  the 
first  treatise  I  intended  it  only  for  a  small  circle  of 
German  friends  and  acquaintances  with  whom  I 


had  been  discussing  the  subject.  Experience  having 
proved  that  I  can  easily  reach  a  large  number,  I 
have  concluded  to  write  this  second  book  in  the 
English  language  that  it  may  be  accessible  to  any 
intelligent  inhabitant  of  this  country. 

This  treatise  contains  a  free  translation  of  all 
those  parts  of  the  German  book  which  describe 
and  criticize  the  existing  conditions  of  sexual  life, 
with  such  little  changes  and  additions  as  appeared 
expedient.  The  "constructive"  part,  however,  em- 
bracing the  elucidations  and  argumentations  in 
regard  to  the  new  theory,  and  the  suggestions  for 
propaganda-work,  is  so  radically  different  from  the 
German  book,  that  it  is  impossible  to  intelligently 
judge  the  one  by  the  other. 

I  am  confident  that  I  shall  be  understood  this 
time!  Remember  that  I  claim  to  offer  what,  from 
the  present  standpoint  of  humanity,  may  justly  be 
termed  a  perfect  solution  of  the  Sex,  Love  and 

Marriage  Questions. 

E.  F.  R. 

MAVVILLE,  Wis.,  July,  189(5. 


CONTENTS. 


Page 

PREFACE  III 

1.  Our  Freethinkers  and  Christian  Morality       -  i 

2.  Explanations  16 

3.  Our  Children  20 

4.  Our  Young  Men  25 

5.  The  Preventive  Check  39 

6.  The  Girls  54 

7.  Love  66 

8.  The  Value  of  Marriage  and  the  Free  Love 

Movement     - .  76 

9.  The  Happy  Marriage  of  To-day  85 
10.     How  long  will  Love  Relations  last  in  a  Free 

Society  ?  96 

u.     Jealousy  and  Possession  105 

12.  The  Old  and  the  New  Ideal  112 

13.  Ethical  Views  on  Coition       -  140 

14.  Love  and  Friendship  in  a  Free  Society  144 

15.  The  Ideal  Society       -  173 

1 6.  The  Number  of  Children  in  a  Free  Society  181 

17.  Undesired  Children    -  188 

1 8.  Licentiousness      -  195 

19.  The  Sense  of  Shame  197 

20.  Obscenity  202 

21.  Prostitution    -             -  207 


Page 

22.  Crime  and  Disease  223 

23.  Ebriosity. — An  Appeal  to  the  Women  230 

24.  Woman's  Emancipation    -  239 

25.  The  Social  Question  254 

26.  The  Propaganda  277 


APPENDIX:    NOTES  AND  COMMENTS  ON  CRITICISMS. 

£.  Introduction  301 

2.  The  Criticism  of  a  Leader  302 

3.  The  Charm  and  Beauty  in  Exclusiveness  315 

4.  Woman  vs.  Man  319 

5.  The  Weakness  of  Woman  323 

6.  "Calling  Names"  327 

7.  Criticisms  of  Socialists  and  Anarchists  329 

8.  Tolstoism              -  331 

9.  A  Paradox     -  -        335 
10.  My  Hopes  and  Fears       -  339 


I. 

Our  Freethinkers  and  Christian 
florality. 


A  CENSUS  of  the  inhabitants  of  our  country 
^"^  with  the  object  of  classification  in  reference  to 
their  religious  beliefs  and  feelings  will  give  us  the 
following  results:  1.  A  comparatively  very  small 
and  insignificant  number  of  persons  imbued  with 
honest  and  fervent  piety  as  it  ruled  the  world  sev- 
eral centuries  ago.  2.  An  equally  small  number 
of  "stanch"  Freethinkers,  who  freely  and  openly 
express  their  opinions  of  God,  Bible  and  priests, 
and  who  consider  it  their  "duty"  to  attack  this 
triumvirate  wherever  they  can.  3.  Here  and 
there  a  few,  who  do  not  only  reject  the  above  trin- 
ity, but  who  are  so  stiff-necked,  that  they  refuse 
the  reverential. bow  to  many  other  "holy  things" 
(such  as  "State,"  "Duty,"  etc.)  4.  An  immense 
crowd,  that  does  not  deserve  any  other  denomina- 
tion than  Indifferent. 

Do  you  doubt  that  genuine  religiousness  is 
extremely  scarce  in  this  country?  Where  do  you 
at  present  see  any  serious  attempt  to  live  accord- 
ing to  the  teachings  of  the  Christian  religion? 


—  2  — 

Where  do  you  notice  even  a  slight  effort  to  do  so? 
Is  it  not  a  rare  exception?  Would  not  such  a  life 
be  the  necessary  and  self-evident  result  of  fervent 
belief?  If  after  answering  these  questions  you 
need  any  further  proof,  read  the  sermons  of  hun- 
dreds of  ardent  ministers  of  the  gospel — there  you 
will  find  my  statement  verified. 

Do  you  doubt  that  there  are  but  few  "stanch" 
Freethinkers?  Our  own  Freethought  Agitators 
eveiy  where  testify  to  that. 

The  priest  laments  the  lack  of  genuine  piety, 
and  curses  the  worldly  lusts  of  his  unmanageable 
flock— the  Freethought  Agitator  is  gradually  be- 
coming more  frequent  and  fervent  in  his  condem- 
nation of  the  weakness,  the  coAvardice,  the  lack  of 
principle,  the  ''reaction"  within  the  ranks  of  the 
skeptics  and  infidels — but  in  spite  of  all  this,  indif- 
ference is  steadily  increasing. 

The  majority  of  the  indifferent  still  belong  to 
some  church  or  otherwise  confess  to  some  kind  of 
religious  belief.  With  many  of  them  it  is  merely  a 
matter  of  custom  or  of  consideration  for  parents, 
other  relatives,  or  friends;  many  seem  to  think 
that  religion  is  the  only  thing  which  can  give  a 
poetic  cha,rm  to  their  lives;  the  mystic  ceremonies 
of  the  church,  the  vague  but  alluring  depiction  of 
heaven  and  its  angels  cause  them  pleasant  dreams, 
which  make  them  forget  for  a  while  the  dullness 
and  dreariness  of  every-day  life.  Many  others  fear 
that  the  separation  from  church  and  religion  will 
endanger  their  ethical  equilibrium,  and  that  a 
good  moral  education  for  their  children  would  be 


impossible.  It  would  6e  unjust  to  call  all  these 
persons  hypocrites.  They  do  believe,  but  they 
deliberately  shun  investigation  and  shrink  from 
any  meditation  on  this  belief.  They  do  not  want 
to  strengthen  it,  as  that  might  force  them  to  be 
consistent  in  conduct.  Neither  do  they  wish  to  be 
freed  from  its  bonds,  because  they  think  they  can 
see  evil,  with  no  counter-balancing  good,  in  doubt 
or  denial.  They  believe,  as  we  sometimes  believe  a 
pretty  little  story  that  you  tell  us.  We  do  not 
care  for  the  proofs  of  the  affirmation  nor  for  the 
negation,  for  the  simple  reason  that  the  former 
might  impel  us  to  decided  action,  for  which  we  are 
not  ready,  while  the  latter  would  destroy  a  pleas- 
ant illusion. 

Many  persons  are  bound  to  the  church  by  com- 
mercial, political  or  social  considerations,  and  some 
even  of  these  evidently  know  the  trick  of  conserv- 
ing their  belief  in  the  manner  just  described.  They 
guard  it  as  the  "sacred"'  element  in  their  feelings, 
which  must  be  cautiously  kept  away  from  any 
close  contact  with  their  intelligence.  The  great 
majority  of  this  class,  however,  deem  this  rather 
difficult  task  superfluous  and  quite  troublesome; 
they  simply  appear  pious  so  often  and  so  long- 
as  they  see  therein  the  least  advantage  for  them- 
selves, and  if  intelligence  does  conquer  the  belief? — 
what  of  it! — others  need  not  know  of  this.  They 
are  hypocrites,  but  I  am  in  doubt  whether  they  do 
any  more  harm  than  the  persons  described  before. 

It  may  seem  strange  that  I  call  all  these 
"indifferent,"  seeing  that  so  many  of  them  are 


4 

extremely  loud  in  their  demonstrations  and  won 
so  ardently  for  their  church.  Please  remember 
that  I  do  not  mean  "indifferent"  to  the  church.  I 
mean  that  they  are  indifferent  as  to  any  serious 
meditation  on  the  subject  of  religion;  that  the 
latter  influences  merely  their  outward  actions,  and 
has  no  notable  effect  on  their  inmost  thoughts 
and  feelings;  that  with  them  the  religious  belief 
does  not  form  the  foundation  of  their  conduct — in 
fact,  is  nothing  but  the  "means"  to  gain  a  certain 
"object"  in  this  life. 

An  almost  equally  large  number  of  the  indiffer- 
ent class  does  not  belong  to  any  church  nor  claim 
any  religious  belief.  Most  of  these  call  themselves 
Freethinkers,  but  their  "freethiiiking''  does  not  go 
any  farther  than  to  ridicule  God,  Bible  and  priest 
(quite  of  ten  even  Avithout  knowing  the  real  mean- 
ing of  these  terms)  and  the  only  advantage  which 
they  can  discover  in  their  freethought  is  that  they 
need  not  pay  out  any  money  for  "this  humbug." 
But  Yankee  "smartness"  is  employed  not  only  in 
business;  it  is  equally  useful  in  the  propaganda  of 
the  American  churches.  The  latter  are  offering 
more  and  more  inducements  in  the  way  of  social 
entertainment  and  enjoyment  in  order  to  "draw 
the  crowd";  in  fact,  many  churches  need  only  danc- 
ing-halls to  make  them  complete  public  places  of 
amusement.  Hence  it  need  not  surprise  us  that 
many  of  the  so-called  Freethinkers  (/'.  e.,  indifferent 
Xo-thinkers)  finally  consider  the  fun  worth  the 
money — and  as  to  the  rites  and  ceremonies,  the 
going  to  church  and  the  "faith"  demanded,  "it 


seems,"  as  one  young  fellow  said  to  me,  "awfully 
silly  at  first,  but  you  soon  get  used  to  it!" 

We  must  admit,  therefore,  that  our  agitator 
is  justified  in  speaking  of  the  present  "reaction," 
but  his  right  to  censure  the  men  and  women  re- 
gained by  the  church  for  "lack  of  principle"  is 
not  so  clear.  It  should  never  be  forgotten  that 
the  pursuit  of  happiness  of  one's  self  is  quite  a 
sound  principle.  I  would  advise  our  Freethought 
Agitator  to  spend  a  little  lews  time  in  exposing  the 
mistakes  of  the  Bible,  and  the  hypocrisy  and  de- 
pravity of  the  priests,  and  use  the  time  saved  in 
furnishing  the  proof  that  Freethought  increases 
the  chances  of  happiness.  By  so  doing  you  can 
gain  the  immense  crowd  of  indifferents  (whatever 
true  religious  belief  they  have  they  will  soon  get 
rid  of  then  without  much  aid  from  outside)  and 
the  few,  who  are  really  pious  and  fervently  reli- 
gious, will  not  cause  much  disturbance. 

But  will  you  be  able  to  furnish  this  proof? 
I  doubt  it  very  much.  Your  position  in  this  res- 
pect is  still  a  very  weak  one.  You  have  freed 
yourselves  from  the  belief  in  the  Christian  God,  the 
Christian  Bible,  etc.,  but  you  have  not  freed  your- 
selves from  the  Christian  code  of  morals,  which  is 
derived  directly  from  the  former.  Hence,  in  your 
debates  with  religious  people  you  often  disgust  us 
with  such  weak  remarks  as  this:  "Although  we  do 
not  believe  in  God  we  are  just  as  moral  as  you 
are!" 

You  cannot  deny  that  the  spirit  of  Christian 
morality  still  reigns  supreme  in  all  your  teachings, 


—  6  — 

and  that  the  fact  that  you  have  nothing  to  offer 
but  meaningless  sophistries  in  place  of  the  reward 
promised  by  the  priests  (heaven  and  eternal  bliss) 
must  naturally  weaken  your  case.  Your  teachers 
have  not  the  courage  to  put  the  "happiness  of 
self"  in  this  life  in  place  of  the  priest's  heaven.  No, 
no,  that  would  be  Egoism  and  that  would  never 
do,  for  "unselfishness,"  "self-sacrifice,"  "self-den- 
ial," etc.,  are  the  ideals  not  only  of  the  fanatical 
priests,  but  of  our  so-called  radicals  as  well.  No 
wonder,  then,  that  your  "moral  teachings"  are  a 
great  failure,  that  with  them  you  only  help  to 
augment  cowardice,  hypocrisy  and  falsehood  in 
this  world. 

It  seems  to  be  about  time  that  you  liberate 
yourself  from  this  foolish  and  disastrous  spirit. 
Have  the  courage  to  step  up  to  the  priests  and 
their  humble  servants  and  say  to  them :  "Our  aim, 
the  object  of  our  lives  is  not,  to  gain  eternal  bliss 
in  heaven;  neither  is  it  to  attain  "truth,  ""justice", 
"true  humanity"  or  the  like — all  these  are  but 
means  to  the  end— for  us  there  can  be  but  one 
adequate  object  and  that  is  our  own  happiness  on 
earth.  Whatever  tends  to  bring  us  nearer  to  this 
we  will  call  "good;"  whatever  disturbs  or  destroys 
this,  will  be  termed  "bad,"  irrespective  of  your 
moral  code,  which  of  course  rests  upon  an  entirely 
different  foundation." 

Go  to  the  youth  and  speak  to  him  thus:  "We 
will  not  fool  and  confuse  you  with  such  a  ridiculous 
saying  as  this,  that  the  final  object  of  your  life 
should  be  the  'happiness  of  others.'  What  other 


object  could  there  be  for  you,  a  Freethinker,  than 
to  make  this,  your  own  life,  as  happy  and  joyful  as 
pos.sible?  We  therefore  ask  no  more  from  you  than 
to  think  about  this  happiness  and  how  best  to 
obtain  it,  to  consider  which  actions  will  tend  to 
increase  it  and  which  may  endanger  it.  Beware, 
however,  of  that  great  mistake  which  some 
thoughtless  persons  are  apt  to  make,  of  thinking 
only  of  the  happiness  of  the  next  hour  or  of  to-day. 
Always  remember  that  you  wish  to  enjoy  for  a 
long  time;  do  not  deprive  yourself  of  the  chance 
for  lasting  happiness  through  one  short  pleasure." 
Look  around  in  this  world  and  investigate; 
discover  where  true  happiness  is  enjoyed  by  human 
beings  and  you  will  soon  be  convinced  that  man 
for  his  highest  happiness  needs  "the  happiness  of 
others,  that  many  actions,  which  heretofore  you 
considered  unselfish,  self-sacrificing,  and  self-deny- 
ing are  in  reality  the  best  means  to  gain  the 
greatest  possible  happiness  of  self ! ,  hence  are 
simply  wise  actions.  Give  to  the  young  the  benefit 
of  your  experiences;  in  place  of  the  lessons  in 
morality  teach  them  how  to  lead  a  happy  life.  In 
this  you  have  a  broader,  better  foundation  for 
your  teachings  than  the  heaven  and  hell  of  the 
priests.  As  it  is,  your  ethics  are  still  thoroughly 
imbued  with  the  spirit  of  a  moral  code  which  is 
weak  and  almost  valueless  without  the  considera- 
tion of  an  eternal  life  after  death.  This  has  refer- 
ence to  almost  everything  that  we  call  "good"  or 
"evil"  in  man. 


In  no  other  sphere,  however,  are  even  the  most 
radical  Freethinkers  so  entirely  under  the  ban  of 
the  priests  (unconsciously,  of  course)  as  in  their 
views  of  the  sexual  life  of  human  beings.  At  all 
times  it  has  been  the  aim  of  proclaimers  of  religions 
to  get  perfect  control  over  sexual  desire,  the  most 
powerful  impulse — as  this  would  give  them  the  best 
means  to  lead  the  great  masses  and  subject  them 
to  their  will.  Even  in  the  oldest  religions  of  which 
history  tells,  we  notice  this  very  plainly ;  the  effort 
has  manifested  itself  in  the  most  diverse  ways,  has 
caused  an  immense  variety  of  laws  and  regula- 
tions, but  no  other  religion  has  dared  to  under- 
take such  a  stern  and  bitter  fight  for  the  absolute 
subjugation  of  this  impulse  as  has  Christianity. 
It  originated  at  a  time  when  the  rulers,  the  rich 
and  the  genteel,  had  reached  the  climax  of  wild 
licentiousness,  which  weakened  and  unnerved  them 
and  which  had  been  caused  by  the  slavish  submis- 
sion of  thousands  under  the  despotism  of  a  few 
(also  a  result  of  religion).  It  was  a  favorable  time 
to  spread  the  doctrine  of  the  Nazarene,  who 
preached  chastity  and  continence.  •.  No  wonder 
that  this  doctrine  met  with  approbation  in  the 
hearts  of  the  many,  who  were  cruelly  oppressed 
and  made  sport  of  by  the  few,  whom  they  had  to 
supply  with  every  possible  means  for  the  most 
excessive  gluttony— this  doctrine,  which  bitterly 
condemned  the  lusts  of  the  rich,  and  promised  to 
the  poor  and  the  suffering  the  first  place  in  heaven. 
It  may  have  been  quite  welcome  even  to  many  of 
the  rulers,  as  it  offered  to  the  enervated  and 


—  9  — 

exhausted  debauchee  a  splended  covering*  for  his 
weakness.  This  period  shows  us  a  transition  from 
the  most  ardent  worship  of  Venus  to  the  most 
ignominious  renunciation  of  all  worldly  pleasures. 

Christian  priests  demanded  humility,  resigna- 
tion, and  self-sacrifice;  they  declared  that  this 
short  life  011  earth  was  but  a  time  of  trial  and  pro- 
bation in  our  existence,  in  which,  through  humble 
miffering  and  self-denial,  we  could  earn  eternal  bliss 
in  heaven ;  they  condemned  all  worldly  pleasures 
and  lusts;  hence  consistency  demanded  that  they 
curse  that  most  passionate  of  all  human  impulses, 
sexual  desire.  They  praised  chastity  and  con- 
tinence as  the  highest  virtues,  fervently  recom- 
mended severe  bodily  discipline  (self-flagellation, 
etc.)  for  the  extermination  of  that  awful  desire  of 
the  flesh.  This  caused  the  human  spirit  to  abhor 
the  natural  needs  and  desires  of  the  body.  This 
warfare  of  the  so-called  spiritual  in  man  against 
the  physical,  the  striving  of  the  mind,  not  merely 
to  control,  but  to  extinguish  the  natural  require- 
ments of  the  body,  generated  the  most  ridiculous 
ideas  and  customs.  We  are  not  freed  from  this 
mad  curse  yet;  many  of  our  so-called  Freethink- 
ers even  are  still  suffering  under  its  woeful  influ- 
ence; they  still  shudder  when  some  moralist  fright- 
ens them  with  such  awful  words  as  "sensuality." 
"lust,"  "carnal  instinct."  and  "brute  desires". 

Of  course  the  priests  could  not  suppress  the 
impulse  entirely,  and  certainly  did  not  mean  to, 
either:  they  declared  that  for  its  satisfaction  their 
benediction  was  imperatively  necessary;  without 


—  10  — 

their  blessing  it  would  be  the  greatest  of  sins;  they 
demanded  that  no  man  should  have  sexual  inter- 
course with  more  than  one  woman;  they  founded 
the  institution  of  Christian  marriage.  We  would 
be  mistaken,  however,  if  we  should  assume  that 
the  sex-act  in  this  marriage  was  considered  sacred 


or  as  the  natural  and  beautiful  outcome  of  lov< 
no,  it  was,  as  ever,  the  weak  yielding  to  a  low,, 
carnal  desire.  Life-long1  continence  was  considered 
purer  and  nobler. 

In  all  former  religions,  as  well  as  in  the  Mo- 
hammedan creed,  (which  appeared  600  years  later 
marriage  laws  had  no  other  object  than  to  regu- 
late the  possession  of  the  women,  man's  property- 
rights  in  them.  Some  demanded  monogamy,  i.  e., 
they  allowed  only  one  lawful  wife,  one  with  whom 
the  husband  could  beget  legitimate  children,  but 
in  none  of  these  religions  did  marriage  mean  for 
the  man  sexual  association  with  one  woman  only. 

In  the  Christian  creed  it  was  likewise  but  a 
question  of  possession,  but  it  made  this  possession, 
at  least  so  far  as  sexual  intercourse  was  concerned, 
a  mutual  possession,  i.  e.,  the  same  so-called  faith- 
fulness was  demanded  of  the  man  as  was  formerly 
asked  only  of  the  wife.  Any  sexual  intimacy  out- 
side of  marriage  was  strictly  prohibited.  In  all 
other  respects,  however,  they  indorsed  the  old 
theory  of  the  subordination  of  the  wife  to  the  will 
of  the  husband ;  they  also  said,  "And  he  shall  be 
thy  master  and  rule  over  thee."  But  the  fact  that 
in  at  least  one  important  particular  they  effected 
an  equalization  in  the  status  of  man  and  woman, 


—  11  -- 

augmented  the  value  of  the  latter  as  a  life-com- 
panion, friend,  and  helpmate  of  man.  When  we 
praise  them  for  this  we  should  not  forget,  however, 
that  this  equalization  meant  a  lowering  of  the 
status  of  man,  i.  e.,  it  brought  him  nearer  to  the 
depraving  condition  of  slavery. 

Exclusive  sexual  intercourse,  the  family,  the 
Joint  household,  and  a  general  association  of  inter- 
ests— all  these  combined  constituted  Christian 
marriage,  L  e.,  gave  the  only  chance  for  a  Christian 
man  to  enter  into  any  intimate  union  with  a 
woman.  A  large  number  of  the  most  diversequali- 
ties  were  therefore  of  value  for  marriage.  Now, 
\\herever  a  person  found  in  a  human  being  of 
the  other  sex  quite  a  number  of  these  qualities 
or  imagined  those  exceptionally  well  developed 
which  appeared  of  most  consequence,  he  (or  she) 
was  liable  to  conceive  a  passionate  craving  for  the 
possession  of  that  particular  being.  He  could 
possess  but  one,  and  to  this  one  he  had  to  give 
himself  up  forever — there  could  be  but  one  choice, 
and  no  ''backing  out".  No  wonder,  then,  that 
considerate  men  should  deem  it  exceedingly  im- 
portant that  before  making  this  choice  the  desire 
should  be  very  passionate,  that  one  being  should 
be  valued  immeasurably  more  than  all  others,  and 
that  towards  all  other  women  (or  men,  as  the  case 
might  be)  the  chooser  should  feel  nothing  but  cold 
indifference.  This  was  necessary  as  the  best 
security  against  subsequent  useless  repentance, 
against  that  great  calamity,  a  desire  for  a  change, 
which  could  not  be  granted.  Here  you  have  the 


—  12  — 

origin  of  that  strange  love  ideal  (eternal  exclusive 
love  for  one  human  being),  which  is  still  causing 
such  ridiculous  confusion  in  many  of  our  most 
radical  minds. 

Of  course  sensual  love,  mere  sexual  preference, 
was  quite  often  the  oi>e  and  only  motive  for  the 
passionate  desire  of  possession — but  it  would  not 
do  to  acknowledge  that  openly,  as  that  would 
promptly  call  forth  such  epithets  as  "base"  and 
"carnal," — hence  it  had  to  be  concealed  behind  a 
screen  of  mystic  and  flowery  phrases.  This  caused 
the  awful  confusion  in  the  conception  of  the  term 
"love.  " 

Our  Liberals  are  not  liberated  from  these  su- 
perstitions yet,  hence  we  must  smile  when  some  of 
our  greatest  thinkers,  whose  mental  deeds  in  other 
spheres  we  look  upon  with  admiration,  begin  to 
philosophize  cm  the  subject  of  love.  What  mons- 
trous sophistry  they  do  employ  in  their  spasmodic 
efforts  to  reconcile  their  experiences  and  the  re- 
sults of  their  studies  in  this  field  with  their  ideal 
of  love!  Why  do  they  not  begin  with  testing  the 
ideal  itself  as  to  its  origin  and  its  value?  This 
would  soon  convince  them  that  it  is  but  an  illu- 
sion with  which  humanity  was  led  astray  by  fan- 
atical priests  many  hundred  years  ago. 

Now  let  us  ask  the  question ;  Can  Christianity 
boast  of  success  with  this  marriage,  as  to  general 
results?  Have  the  Christians  willingly  and  gladly 
bowed  themselves  to  the  yoke?  Have  they  eagerly 
obeyed  the  orders  from  above?  Who  dares  answer, 
Yes?  Side  by  side  with  this  glorious  institution 


—  13  — 

of  marriage  we  have  seen  always  and  everywhere 
extensive  prostitution  in  its  most  depraved  and 
depraving  form.  The  utmost  exertions  were  made 
to  suppress  it,  laws  with  the  most  dreadful  punish- 
ments were  tried,  but  prostitution  defied  all  efforts, 
it  had  come  to  stay  as  well  as  marriage.  The 
priest  says  that  this  shows  us  the  miserable  de- 
pravity of  humanity,  and  his  flock,  with — I  am 
sorry  I  must  admit  it — many  so-called  Freethink- 
ers, thoughtlessly  repeat  his  words  and  lament  the 
perpetuity  of  that  "necessary  evil!"  But  not  all 
of  them — many  thousands  are  beginning  to  sus- 
pect that  it  might  be  well  to  seriously  consider 
the  question  whether  the  human  soul  is  really 
so  utterly  depraved,  and  whether  this  depravity 
might  not  possibly  be  in  that  grand  old  marriage 
institution  itself! 

Many  centuries  have  gone  by  since  Christ  pro- 
claimed to  the  world  the  doctrine,  "Love  thy 
neighbor  as  thyself,"  which  has  been  carried  out 
by  his  pious  followers  in  such  a  remarkably  queer 
manner.  During  this  time  the  Christian  creed  has 
suffered  many  significant  changes,  it  has  had  to 
concede  a  great  deal  to  progressing  science,  but  in 
one  sphere — that  of  the  sexual  relations— it  still 
exercises  almost  without  diminution,  with  Free- 
thinkers as  well  as  with  its  devotees,  its  malicious 
and  mind-deranging  power. 

Freethinkers!  by  a  grand  and  noble  struggle 
you  have  gradually  wrenched  from  the  church 
nearly  all  of  its  legal  power — now  the  time  has 
come  to  free  vourselves  from  the  most  harmful 


—  14  — 

part  of  its  dreary  doctrine.  Comprehend  at  last, 
that  we,  as  Freethinkers,  have  no  reason  whatever 
to  despise  any  part  of  our  bodies  or  their  functions 
— comprehend,  that  an  impulse,  a  desire,  which  is 
•developed  in  every  strong-  and  healthy  human 
being;  as  something-  self-evicfently  natural, — the 
satisfaction  of  which  causes  pleasure  and  joy— 
which  engenders  ardent  love  of  man  for  woman 
and  woman  for  man  —  comprehend  that  this  is 
altogether  too  good  and  exalting  to  be  trampled 
into  the  mud  by  fanatic  priests.  Do  not  let  them 
scare  you  any  more  with  tlieir  sneering  remarks 
about  '"base  motives,"  "carnal  instincts."  and 
"brute  desires,"  but  answer  them  smilingly,  that 
you  are  proud  of  belonging  to  that  highest  class 
of  animals  which  heartily  delight  in  exactly  the 
same  physical  pleasures  as  the  lower  classes,  but 
which  nature  has  endowed  with  such  superior 
mental  and  emotional  capacities  that  they  are 
enabled  to  greatly  embellish  and  enhance  each 
little  act  of  physical  pleasure  by  surrounding  and 
imbuing  it  with  supreme  mental  and  aesthetic  en- 
joyments. Tell  them  furthermore  that  you  con- 
sider this  very  much  better  than  to  be  regarded 
as  a  kind  of  spoilt  and  degenerated  "image  of 
God,"  who  has  to  fight  forever  with  a  malicious 
devil  within  himself.  And  when  you  consider  these 
serious  problems  of  love  and  marriage,  liberate 
yourselves  from  all  these  foolish  superstitions  with 
which  you  were  imbued  by  a  Christian  or  pseudo- 
radical  education ;  let  one  question  only  decide  in 
each  and  every  case:  ''Will  this  increase  or  dimin- 


—  15  — 

ish  the  chances  for  a  happy  life?" — and  act  accord- 
ingly. 

Thus  will  you  become  a  powerful  agent  for  the 
propaganda  of  Freethougiit. 

Then  let  the  truly  pious  practice  discipline  and 
self-denial  as  much  as  they  please;  their  happiness 
will  consist  in  hope,  in  fervent  trust  in  a  better 
hereafter;  let  free  men  and  women  enjoy  whatever 
this  beautiful  world  has  to  offer— and  that  im- 
mense crowd  of  indifferent  no-thinkers  uill  soon 
1)5  forced  to  give  some  serious  thought  to  the  sub- 
ject, and  to  "choose  sides!" 


II. 

Explanations. 


T  WILL  state  at  once  that  the  ''solution"  is  sim- 
•*•  pi  y  this :  Freedom  ! 

That  a  great  many  of  the  existing  evils,  espec- 
ially in  our  sexual  affairs,  would  be  promptly 
exterminated  or  diminished  by  freedom,  is  so  self- 
evident  that  any  person  of  fair  intelligence  \\i\\ 
concede  this  without  lengthy  argumentation.  But 
even  our  most  intelligent  men  and  women  are  very 
apt  to  fear  that  the  remedy  would  be  worse  than 
the  evil,  j.  e.,  that  the  dangers  caused  by  freedom 
would  be  greater  than  those  which  it  would  re- 
move. It  will  be  my  object  to  prove  that  these 
fears  are  groundless. 

"Another  Free  Love  book!"  the  readers  will 
say,  and  I  suppose  that  many  will  make  up  their 
minds  that  nothing  more  is  in  store  for  them  than 
simply  a  repetition  of,  and  probably  an  addition 
to.  the  arguments  for  a  well-known  theory. 

I  certainly  do  not  object  to  such  a  title,  but, 
to  avoid  misunderstanding,  I  deem  it  necessary  to 
call  attention  to  an  important  difference  between 
this  treatise  and  the  present  Free  Love  literature 


-  17  — 

of  the  world,  with  which  I  am  well  acquainted.  In 
the  latter  you  will  find  hundreds  of  sound  and 
irrefutable  reasons  for  demanding  perfect  freedom 
from  all  legal  interference  with  love  relations,  and 
many  an  able  and  enthusiastic  plea  for  the  rights 
of  the  individual  in  this  sphere.  These  points  have 
been  elucidated  in  an  excellent  manner  by  many 
noble  men  and  women  of  this  country,  as  well  as 
by  the  acutest  reasoners  of  almost  every  other 
civilized  nation,  and  the  subject  seems  well  nigh 
exhausted.  I  do  not  expect,  therefore,  to  add  any- 
thing particularly  valuable  to  the  argumentation 
on  these  points. 

I  am  opposed  to  legal  interference;  I  have 
positively  no  use  in  my  theory  for  any  State  law; 
but  I  do  not  intend  to  argue  the  subject  in  this 
treatise.  As  I  wish  to  show  how  the  small  minority 
should  act  now,  I  will  be  compelled  to  reckon  with 
the  laws  that  do  exist,  however  absurd  they  may 
appear  to  me. 

In  regard  to  the  rights  of  the  individual  in  the 
realm  of  love  as  claimed. by  the  most  radical  of 
Free  Lovers,  I  will  say  that  I  do  not  intend  to 
prove  them  —  I  take  them  for  granted.  Those 
readers  who  are  still  laboring  under  the  delusion 
that  they  are  in  duty  bound  to  live  "for  others." 
will  have  to  study  other  works  before  they  will  be 
able  to  follow  me  in  my  elucidations  with  that 
unprejudiced  composure  of  the  mind  which  seems 
necessary  for  a  clear  understanding  of  this  as  yet 
rather  difficult  subject. 


—  18  — 

The  question  which  I  intend  to  answer  is  not  a 
question  of  rights,  but  of  expediency.  I  will  not 
show  you  what  you  have  a  right  to  do,  but  what 
you  should  do  in  order  to  lead  a  happier  and  a 
nobler  life.  I  will  offer  you  a  new  Philosophy  of 
Love,  with  such  propositions  and  suggestions  as  I 
can  substantiate  by  sound  arguments. 

And  now  I  may  say  that  when  I  speak  of  free- 
dom as  the  solution  of  the  questions  named  in  the 
preface,  I  mean  not  only  immunity  from  all  legal 
interference,  but,  what  I  would  call  far  more  im- 
portant, emancipation  from  superstition  and  the 
resulting  customs  and  false  ideals. 

I  may  frequently  use  the  terms  "free  men  and 
women''  and  "free  society."  As,  according  to 
general  usage,  these  words  would  imply  either 
infinitely  more  or  considerably  less  than  they  will 
mean  as  I  will  employ  them  here,  it  is  necessary  to 
state  that  wherever  these  terms  are  used  in  this 
treatise,  they  will  simply  mean  that  the  individuals 
and  groups  mentioned  are  free* from  superstitions 
inherited  from  religion  and  relating  to  the  love- 
and  sex-life  of  human  beings. 

As  I  wish  to  propose  a  radical  change  of  our 
entire  social  life,  I  will  have  to  begin  with  showing 
the  evils  of  the  present  system  in  order  to  prove 
the  necessity  for  a  change.  Thousands  have  done 
this  before  me — but  this  subject  does  indeed  seem 
almost  inexhaustible,  and  I  will  have  to  add  my 
share  in  order  to  make  my  book  a  fairly  full  trea- 
tise on  the  subject.  I  will  not  be  able,  however,  to 
resist  the  temptation  to  relieve  the  monotony  of 


—  19  — 

these  dreary  pictures  by  an  occasional  glimpse  of 
the  "free  society,"  even  before  the  latter  is  fairly 
introduced  to  the  reader. 

Shall  I  follow  the  example  of  some  writers  and 
offer  lengthy  excuses  for  speaking-  plainly  and 
frankly  on  such  a  "delicate"  and  "tabooed"  sub- 
ject? No,  that  would  be  ludicrous  hypocrisy  now. 
He  must  be  a  great  fool  indeed  who  fails  to  see 
that  the  sex-relations  have  an  immense  influence 
for  the  weal  or  woe  of  humanity,  and  that  in  this 
sphere  "many  things  are  not  as  they  ought  to  be;" 
hence  it  should  be  clear  to  every  one  who  can  think 
somewhat  logically,  that  a  thorough  investigation 
of  this  subject  is  absolutely  necessary  if  we  wish  to 
strive  wherever  we  can  for  an  increase  of  our 
chances  of  happiness. 

I  will  endeavor,  however,  in  each  and  every 
case  to  use  the  least  objectionable  expression 
known  to  me  which  will  assure  a  clear  and  unmis- 
takable understanding  of  my  meaning. 

I  ask  the  kind  indulgence  of  the  reader  for  the 
many  faults  in  the  form  and  style  of  the  treatise, 
but  I  also  ask  the  strictest  examination,  the  most 
rigorous  investigation,  of  the  theories  and  sugges- 
tions— and  I  feel  that  I  am  somewhat  entitled  to 
both,  as  my  one  and  only  object  is  to  promote  our 
happiness  on  earth  ! 


III. 

Our  Children. 


TN  order  to  show  the  urgent  necessity  for  a  rad- 
ical change  in  our  sexual  affairs,  I  will  begin 
my  subject  by  drawing  a  picture  of  the  conditions 
as  they  are  at  present.  1  will  be  very  careful  not 
to  use  any  more  black  paint  than  Truth  demands, 
and  will  not  try  to  obscure  any  bright  aspect  which 
may  present  itself,  but,  alas,  the  picture  will  be 
still  a  very  dark  and  dreaiy  one.  I  will  also  show 
in  each  case  the  changes  which  would  be  brought 
about  by  the  development  of  a  free  society,  and  in 
this  I  will  take  due  care  not  to  draw  any  eonclu- 
isio'ns  except  -such  as  would  be  conceded  by  every 
logical  thinker  to  be  the  self-evident  results  of  free- 
dom. I  can  assure  the  reader  that  we  can  afford 
to  be  extremely  liberal  towards  our  opponents  in 
debate. 

Let  us  begin  with  the  children.  In  what  does 
their  education  consist,  so  far  as  sexuality  is  con- 
cerned? We  teach  them  to  be  ashamed  of  and 
despise  certain  parts  of  their  bodies.  If  they  should 
happen  to  hear  of  any  sexual  act,  they  are  taught 
to  consider  it  as  something  low,  mean,  and  dirty. 
They  are  forbidden  to  speak  about  the  parts  and 


—  21  — 

their  functions ;  they  are  advised  never  to  think  of 
them,  and  to  evade  the  dreadful  question  wherever 
it  is  presented  to  them.  If  the  unsuspecting-, 
innocent  child  happens  to  mention  the  subject  it 
will  promptly  hear  such  exclamations  as  "Fie,  for 
shame!",  "that's  nasty!"  et  al.  This  is  what  is 
called  giving  them  a  "pure"  moral  education. 

Some  reader  might  reply  that  many  intelli- 
gent parents  have  outgrown  this  "rude"  manner 
of  education,  and  that  the  necessary  "sense  of 
shame"  can  be  instilled  into  the  child  in  a  far  more 
delicate  manner,  but  I  can  assure  you  that  this 
will  make  but  very  little  difference.  What  3"ou 
leave  out  will  be  promptly  furnished  by  others,  by 
the  neighbors,  or  the  playmates  in  school  and  on 
the  street. 

Mysteries  will  forever  have  enticing  charm,  and 
the  fact  that  you  cover  them  with  mud  will  not 
keep  the  "coarse  nature"  from  exposing  them  to 
others  at  times,  nor  will  it  keep  the  "sensitive 
nature"  from  digging  for  them  in  secrecy.  Notice 
the  defiant  exultation  with  which  "little  toughy" 
speaks  out  the  vulgar  term  for  the  sex-act,  or 
draws  a  crude  picture  of  the  "nasty  thing,  which 
we  all  have,"  when  he  thinks  that  only  small  boys 
are  around.  Notice  the  tremor  and  flush  which 
passes  over  sweet  little  "Mamma's  Pet,"  who  for 
the  first  time  is  a  witness  to  the  awful  doings  of 
the  "bad  boy" — he  is  shocked  and  repulsed,  but, 
ah!  this  bad  boy  is  such  a  "good  fellow"  other- 
wise, he  can  do  such  grand  and  courageous  deeds, 
he  tells  such  queer  and  interesting  stories  of  the 


—  22  — 

secret  doings  of  the  "big  folks!";  one  cannot 
always  shun  his  society.  However,  "Mama's  Pet" 
is  too  refined  to  be  "spoilt"  by  the  bad  boy;  he 
will  never  do  or  say  such  awful  things,  but,  as  he 
is  a  smart  boy,  he  cannot  help  thinking  about 
them.  Of  course  he  would  not  dare  speak  to  any- 
body about  this,  but  when  he  is  all  alone  the  idea 
will  come  to  him  with  ever-increasing  fascination 
"to  solve  these  mysterious  problems."  As  his 
thoughts  are  bent  so  strongly  in  this  direction,  ever- 
obliging  nature  will  promptly  direct  her  creative 
power  mainly  to  the  development  of  the  sexual 
faculties  (neglecting  other  faculties,  of  course). 
The  result  will  be  sexual  prematurity,  so-called 
"secret  vices,"  which  are  very  liable  to  be  car- 
ried to  the  most  extreme  excess  through  sheer 
ignorance — and  ten  years  later  we  find  that  the 
pretty  little  fellowr,  who  seemed  so  sound  in  mind 
and  body,  who  was  constantly  surrounded  by  the 
loving  care  of  intelligent  parents,  has  not  reached 
and  probably  never  will  reach  a  condition  en- 
titling him  to  be  called  "a  man,"  while  the  "bad 
boy,"  the  neglected  street-urchin  has  grown  into 
a  strong  and  healthy,  though  probably  a  coarse 
and  vulgar,  man.  And  what  does  the  mother 
of  the  patient  sa.y?  What  is  the  considerate 
diagnosis  of  the  family  physician,  who  dares  not 
speak  or  perhaps  does  not  know  the  truth?  "Poor 
fellow,  he  was  'too  smart  a  child,'  his  mental 
faculties  developed  too  rapidly  for  his  weak  body!" 
The  girls  are  kept  aloof  from  all  "immorality" 
even  more  strictly  and  severely  than  the  boys. 


23 

The  effort  to  imbue  them  with  a  thorough  detesta- 
tion of  everything  pertaining  to  the  sexual  is  yet 
more  consistent  and  persistent  than  in  the  case  of 
the  boys. 

In  spite,  however,  of  all  your  care  and  vigilance, 
the  children  will  here  and  there  hear  the  "forbidden 
things"  alluded  to  or  even  openly  spoken  of  by 
adults.  What  strange  object-lessons  they  must 
receive  thereby,  when  they  notice  that  the  same 
thing  creates  alternately  scorn  and  disgust  or  ill- 
concealed  desire  and  delight!  To  what  awful 
brood  ings  this  may  lead  them  if  they  are  neither- 
indolent  nor  stupid ! 

In  short,  the  entire  education  in  this  respect 
can  have  no  other  tendency  than  to  create  either 
cold  and  stupid  indifference,  or  morbid  sensuality. 
What  may  add  still  more  sadness  to  the  picture  is 
the  fact  that  the  danger  of  creating  either  one  of 
these  two  extremes  (especially  the  latter)  is  never 
greater  than  when  the  education  in  every  other 
respect  is  worthy  to  be  called  first  class,  that  is, 
where,  with  an  otherwise  rational  culture  of  the 
body,  the  greatest  possible  development  of  the 
intellect  is  sought.  Such  education  will  encourage 
independent  thinking,  love  of  investigation  and 
experiment,  and  where  all  this  is  combined  with 
"true  morality  and  purity/'  in  the  meaning  of  the 
present  nonsensical  code,  the  chances  for  sexual 
health  will  be  indeed  very  small.  This  also  gives 
us  an  explanation  of  the  fact  that  by  far,  com- 
paratively, the  greatest  number  of  sexually  sound 


—    24:    — 

yovmg  people  are  to  be  found  in  the  so-called  lower 

or  uneducated  classes. 

* 
*         * 

How  different  it  will  be  in  free  society !  There 
the  child  from  its  earliest  youth  will  hear  every- 
body speak  about  sexual  subjects  in  the  same 
natural,  free,  and  easy  manner  that  they  do  about 
other  matters.  When  in  its  school-work  it  reaches 
the  study  of  the  human  body,  the  teacher  will  not 
leave  out  important  parts,  "because  it  would  be 
indecent  to  speak  about  them,"  but  will  expect  his 
pupil  to  "know  his  lesson"  in  regard  to  the  sex- 
ual organs  and  their  functions  as  well  as  any 
other.  There  will  be  none  of  the  old  dangers  for 
"Mama's  Pet,"  and  no  occasion  for  the  "bad  boy" 
to  brag  of  his  "knowledge  of  the  world."  There 
will  be  no  great  secrets  which  the  parents  dare  not 
share  with  their  children,  .hence  it  will  be  an  easy 
matter  for  the  former  to  protect  their  dear  ones 
from  any  perils  which  may  menace  their  sexual  life. 
Education  will  of  course  be  free  from  that  disas- 
trous attempt  to  forcibly  and  deceitfully  suppress 
a  healthy  natural  impulse;  the  only  object  will  be 
to  induce  the  greatest  possible  harmoniousness  in 
the  development  of  all  faculties  of  the  mind  and 
body.  For  the  child  there  will  be  no  piquant 
charm  to  incite  to  morbid  brooding  in  secrecy,  no 
great  mysteries  to  be  solved  in  solitude,  no  omin- 
ous allusions  to  enflarne  the  imagination — in  short. 
no  provocatives  to  prematurity,  hypocrisy,  weak- 
ness, and  sexual  disease. 


IV. 
Our  Young  Men. 


TN  the  previous  chapter  I  called  attention  to  the 
fact  that  our  present  foolish  customs  bring 
great  dangers  to  the  boy  and  girl  even  long  before 
the  normal  time  of  puberty.  I  will  gladly  admit 
that  for  many  a  boy  with  a  strong  body  and  an 
average  intellect  these  dangers  may  hardly  exist  or 
that  he  may  be  easily  saved  from  them — although 
many  students  of  the  subject  assert  that  an  al- 
most general  sexual  prematurity  may  be  noticed 
in  the  so-called  higher  classes.  We  will  now  con- 
sider the  status  of  the  youth  after  puberty.  The 
virtuous  boy  notices  suddenly,  and  with  increas- 
ing wonder  and  amazement,  that  all  those  parts 
and  acts  which  heretofore  appeared  to  him  as 
the  lowest,  meanest  and  dirtiest,  now  possess  a 
peculiar  charm,  that  the  thought  of  them  causes 
him  a  rather  agreeable  prickling  sensation.  It  is 
the  awakening  of  that  natural  and  powerful  im- 
pulse, sexual  instinct,  which  even  the  most  formid- 
able preaching  of  so-called  morality  cannot  effec- 
tually suppress  in  a  strong  and  healthy  boy.  I 
want  to  show  to  you  now  that,  no  matter  how, 
under  existing  conditions,  the  youth  deals  with 


—  26  — 

this  impulse,  each  and  every    possible  way 
bring  serious  injury  either  to  his  character  or  his 
body. 

1.  If  he  is  a  noble,  conscientious  fellow  with  a 
strong  character  he  will  try  to  strictly  conform  to 
the  rules  of  morality;  he  will  exert  himself  to  the 
utmost  to  suppress  his  supposed  depravity  (the 
pleasurable  feelings  caused  by  erotic  thoughts)— 
in  which  he  will  of  course  often  fail.  His  condition 
is  described  thus  by  a  German  physician:  ''Pur- 
sued by  wild  erotic  images,  tormented  by  frequent 
erections,  the  ardent  youth  fights  with  courage 
and  noble  intent  to  defend  the  citadel  of  his 
chastity ;  he  seeks  refuge  in  his  studies  and  in 
severe  physical  exercise."  (Poor  fellow,  instead  of 
enjoying  love,  he  falls  into  morbid  and  dreary 
philosophizing  on  the  subject!)  Ah,  it  is  a  hard 
struggle,  and  many  finally  become  weak  and  sur- 
render; they  will  then  belong  to  class  two,  which 
we  will  consider  hereafter.  "If  he  is  invincible  and 
wins  the  battle,  then  the  strong  sexual  desires  as 
well  as  the  erections  will  gradually  disappear;  'fce 
has  conquered  the  enemy !'  But  do  not  forget  that 
we  can  never  triumph  over  such  strong  natural 
impulses  without  severe  punishment.  A  vague 
feeling  of  restlessness  and  dissatisfaction  with  the 
world  will  come  to  our  hero,  he  will  loose  his  cheer- 
fulness and  mental  energy,  will  get  nervous  and 
fretful  and  in  almost  every  case  will  be  tormented 
by  indigestion  (that  faithful  companion  of  mental 
troubles);  weak  and  exhausted,  it  will  be  im- 
possible for  him  to  fix  his  close  attention  on  the 


-27- 

subjects  which  he  would  like  to  study;  his  mind, 
formerly  buoyant  and  vivacious,  has  become  dull 
and  indolent;  instead  of  being  moved  with  the  im- 
petuous objective  passion  of  youth,  he  is  timid 
and  bashful,  giving  himself  up  to  morbid  sub- 
jective speculations,  so  that  even  the  mere  thought 
of  female  society  may  be  repulsive  to  him." 

Is  that  the  reward  for  good  behavior?  Xo;  it- 
is  merely  the  punishment  for  a  foolish  and  un- 
natural way  of  living.  If  you  should  have  the  least 
doubts  concerning  the  existence  of  the  great  evils 
which  must  follow  strictly  enforced  continence  in  a 
strong  and  healthy  young  man,  I  would  advise 
you  to  study  them  or  to  ask  any  conscientious 
physician,  who  makes  this  subject  his  specialty. 
You  will  soon  know  a  long  list  of  evil  effects  of 
continence,  of  which  involuntary  emission  is  by  far 
the  least  significant.  If  this  last  is  neither  the 
result  of  an  organic  defect  (as  it  may  be  caused 
sometimes  by  extreme  malpractice)  nor  of  a  forced 
and  artificial  exciting  of  erotic  sensations,  that  is, 
if  it  is  experienced  by  the  young  and  healthy  man 
and  is  associated  with  a  delightful  sensation,  it  is 
no  evil  at  all,  but  is  simply  the  manner  in  which 
nature  ''helps  itself".  Our  '"pure"  and  "chaste" 
youth,  however,  is  filled  with  horror  and  dismay 
when  such  a.  "dreadful  thing"  happens  to  him.  He 
has  exerted  his  will  power  to  the  utmost  to  banish 
those  luring  sirens  from  his  troubled  brain  and 
now,  behold!  one  wild  dream  has  baffled  all  his 
efforts !  He  now  is  convinced  that  disease  has  been 
added  to  his  "depravity".  Will  he  go  to  his 


—  28  — 

« 

parents  or  his  friends  for  advice?  Oh,  no,  he  would 
not  pollute  those  "pure"  dear  ones  with  such 
vile  things!  Will  he  consult  the  honored  family 
physician?  Oh,  no,  the  "sense  of  shame"  will  keep 
him  from  that  also.  He  may  go  to  some  quack, 
whom  nobody  knows,  or  he  may  study,  trembling 
with  fear  and  shame,  those  mysterious  advertise- 
ments in  our  dailies — and  everywhere  he  will  read : 
"Lost!  Lost!" 

2.  The  second  group  represents  those  young 
men  who  are  equally  virtuous  and  conscientious 
with  the  last-named,  but  who  have  a  weaker 
character.  They  feel  from  the  beginning  that  it 
will  be  impossible  for  them  to  come  out  victorious 
in  the  battle  against  these  strange  new  feelings. 
They  soon  become  acquainted  with  that  satis- 
faction of  the  desires  which  is  so  extremely  easy 
and  convenient  and  so  extremely  secret  and  safe — 
onanism. 

It  is  not  necessary  to  draw  a  picture  of  the 
evil  results  of  this  so-called  self-abuse.  Thousands 
have  done  so,  and  I  can  assure  you  that  they  have 
used  more  of  the  black  paint  in  their  work  than 
was  necessary  or  expedient.  I  will  call  attention, 
however,  to  the  fact  that  the  mode  of  agitation 
against  this  "-vice"'  which  is  almost  generally 
adopted  by  our  would-be  reformers  in  this  field,  is 
about  the  most  nonsensical  and  the  most  harmful 
which  can  be  imagined.  They  begin  with  calling  it 
a  "dreadful,  nasty  vice"  or  a  "horrible  crime"- 
and  this  can  have  no  other  effect  than  to  take 
from  the  majority  of  young  men  a  great  part  of 


—  29  — 

their  self-esteem  and  self-respect  (as  but  few  can 
claim  perfect  innocence  in  this.)  The  next  move  is 
to  scare  the  youth  with  the  most  horrible  predic- 
tions, so  that  the  agony  of  fear  and  dreadful 
apprehensions  deprives  him  of  that  which  is  most 
necessary  for  resistance — courage  and  self-reliance. 
Finally,  some  general  good  advice  is  given  for  the 
promotion  of  health,  such  as  "early  to  bed  and 
•early  to  rise",  frequent  walks  in  fresh  air, healthful 
physical  labor,  gymnastics,  and  so  forth.  This 
advice  is  salutary,  and  if  followed  will  certainly 
increase  health,  and  good  health  will  increase  the 
power  of  resistance;  this  vce  must  admit,  but 
these  innocent  reformers  seem  to  be  perfectly  un- 
conscious of  the  fact  that  good  health  not  only 
increases  the  power  of  resistance,  but  that  it  also 
increases  the  power  of  the  "devil  within. ourselves" 
which  has  to  be  resisted  ! 

Let  us  stop  these  fatal  fooleries.  Under  present 
conditions  it  is  absurd  to  speak  of  onanism  as 
that  "dreadful"'  secret  sin,  and  our  moralists  are 
not  at  all  justified  in  calling  it  a  vice,  much  less  a 
crime.  An  honest  and  truthful  man  would  say  to 
the  youth  :  "If  you  fervently  believe  in  the  present 
moral  code,  if  you  have  the  desire  to  be  a  moral 
and  virtuous  man,  a  generally  respected  person, 
you  will  be  obliged  to  choose  this  mode  of  satisfac- 
tion of  your  sexual  desires,  for  all  other  ways  will 
lead  you  to  far  greater  or  at  least  more  striking- 
offenses  against  morality.  As  it  may  be  some 
consolation  to  you,  I  will  inform  you  that  all  our 
'nice'  and  'virtuous'  young  men,  who  despise  all 


—  30  — 

"immorality",  do  the  same  thing.  Take  due  care,, 
however,  never  to  submit  to  any  whim,  to  yield 
only  to  the  spontaneous  and  irresistable  demands, 
of  nature;  never  satisfy  the  desire  before  it  has  be- 
come very  strong  (of  course  without  ever  willfully 
doing  anything  to  provoke  and  augment  this  de- 
sire.) As  you  wish  to  'sin'  as  little  as  possible,  it 
is  practical  to  center  your  thoughts  as  much  as 
you  can  on  prosaic  things,  which  have  no  connec- 
tion with  love  or  lust.  For  this  purpose  nothing 
is  better  than  to  interest  yourself  as  early  as 
possible  in  business  speculations.  In  your  'fre- 
quent walks  for  health'  calculating  on  a  good 
money-making-scheme  is  about  the  best  way  to 
keep  your  thoughts  from  that  decidedly  danger- 
ous, because  so  indiscreetly  suggestive,  study  of 
nature!  and  figuring  out  a  tough  example  in 
Dollars  and  Cents  just  before  going  to  sleep  will  do 
good  service  in  keeping  that  'luring  siren'  from 
your  dreams !  In  this  way  you  may  preserve  fairly 
good  health;  you  will  lose  hardly  any  time 
through  this  little  'evil';  you  can  devote  it  all  to 
making  money,  and  when  you  have  scraped  to- 
gether a  sufficient  amount  you  can  choose  wiselv 
and  deliberately,  as  a 'pure' man,  the 'pure' maiden 
for  the  holy  state  of  matrimony — and  satisfy  your- 
self to  your  heart's  content,  for  what  formerly 
would  have  been  a  dreadful  sin  is  now  'marital 
duty!'  You  will  be  praised  as  a  smart  and  sensible 
man,  as  a  strictly  moral  character,  as  a  model  of 
virtue,  and  you  will  feel  that  you  have  a  right  to 
look  down  with  scorn  and  contempt  upon  those 


low  beings  who  are  led  iuto  such  foolish  actions 
by  their  'base'  and  'carnal'  desires!  Yes,  even  to 
old  age  you  may  retain  such  a  pure  soul  that  one 
roguish  wink  of  a  piquant  priestess  of  Venus  may 
be  sufficient  to  bring  the  flush  of  shame  and  indig- 
nation to  your  cheeks." 

Of  course  there  are  some  drawbacks  to  this 
mode  of  living.  It  will  give  you  a  rather  cowardly, 
.mean,  and  unmanly  character:  you  will  be  very 
much  inclined  to  look  only  at  the  dark  side  of 
things;  you  will  not  be  able  to  appreciate  the 
beauties  of  nature  and  art.  which  give  to  others  so 
much  real  enjoyment,  and  the  jovial  ''men  of  the 
world"  will  ridicule  you  and  laugh  at  you.  This 
jeering  may  not  cause  you  much  annoyance,  how- 
ever, as  you  will  have  the  proud  feeling  of  being  a 
"better  man,"  who  is  entitled  to  sit  in  judgment 
upon  these  "vagrants." 

But  suppose  you  should  wish  to  be  a  man  in 
the  full  sense  of  the  word,  hale,  vigorous,  and 
courageous,  and  remain  thus  up  to  old  age;  that 
you  should  desire  to  retain  for  life  the  suscepti- 
bility to  the  beautiful  in  art  and  nature,  and  the 
cheerfulness  of  mind  and  vigor  of  body  essential 
to  a  jovial  enjoyment  of  life,  and  yet  should  wish 
to  be  a  moral,  virtuous  man  in  the  meaning  of  the 
society  code  of  to-day,  and  would  not  stoop  to 
hypocrisy — then  no  honest,  truthful  man  can  give 
you  any  other  answer  than  that  it  is  utterly  im- 
possible! 

3.  The  third  class  is  composed  of  young  men 
satisfv  their  sexual  desire  in  so-called  ''houses 


—  32  — 

of  ill-fame."  Much  has  been  said  and  written  about 
the  awful  results  of  prostitution,  but  it.  seems  that 
but  very  few  have  realized  that  by  far  the  greatest 
damage  done  by  this  evil  consists  in  the  ruinous 
effect  which  it  must  have  on  the  character  of  our 
young  men.  Every  one  of  them  is  forced  to  the 
meanest  hypocrisy,  if  he  shares  the  prevalent 
moral  view  he  must  lose  his  self-respect  if  he  goes 
to  such  places,  and  every  student  of  human  nature 
will  admit  that  loss  of  self-respect  produces  more 
real  criminals  than  any  other  cause. 

4.  What  I  have  said  of  class  three  is  true, 
even  in  a  greater  degree,  of  class  four,  7.  e.,  of  the 
young  men  who  satisfy  their  desires  in  real  love 
relations  (or  at  least  with  previously  "chaste" 
women).    These    "seducers,"    "libertines",     "Don 
Juans  '  (or  whatever  other  pretty  name  you  m;i\ 
choose  to  give  them)  have  the  advantage  of  a  far- 
mere  agreeable  satisfaction,  but  to  be  successful  in 
their  pursuit  and  to  save  themselves  from  the  con- 
demnation and  persecution  of  the  people  they  need 
a  still  greater  proficiency  than  class  three  in  the 
arts  of  hypocrisy,  lying  and  cheating. 

5.  To  be  exhaustive,  I  must  mention  a  fifth 
class,  that  is,  those  men  whose  physical  nature 
(which  may  be  normal    and  healthy  otherwise) 
lacked  from  the  beginning  the  sexual  instinct  (ns  ,-i 
result  of  some  "strange  freak  of  nature"  I  sup- 
pose) or  in  whom  this  instinct  is  so  weak  that  its 
suppression  will  cause  neither  trouble  nor  harm. 
These  are  extremely  rare  exceptions,  and  it  would 
not  be  necessarvto  further  consider  them  if  it  were 


-  33  — 

not  for  the  fact  that  quite  a  number  of  persons 
honestly  believe  that  such  a  state  should  be  wel- 
comed as  a  high  degree  of ''purity."  These  fana- 
tics, who  are  mostly  women,  even  go  so  far  as  to 
propose,  that  by  a  "pure"  conception  ^that  is, 
without  pleasurable  sensations),  and  a  "pure"  life 
of  the  woman  during  pregnancy,  and  non-stimulat- 
ing diet  we  should  try  to  increase  the  number  of 
men  and  women  (especially  the  former  of  course), 
who  would  be  free  from  these  "base"  and  "carnal" 
•desires!  In  a  pious  Christian  this  is  no  more  than 
consistency,  but  what  shall  we  think  of  those 
women  who  seriously  recommend  this  theory  and 
still  have  the  audacity  to  call  themselves  "Free- 
thinkers"! I  will  not  argue  the  question  of  purity 
at  present,  but  I  will  inform  these  persons  that,  if 
they  should  be  successful  in  their  experiments  (and 
I  have  no  doubt  that  a  great  deal  can  be  achieved 
in  this  direction)  they  would  find  that  a  great 
many  of  those  qualities  which  they  consider  good 
and  noble  in  man  had  disappeared  with  the  sexual 
desire. 

6.  As  the  sixth  and  last  class,  I  have  to  name 
those  men  who  enter  into  marriage  immediately 
after  they  have  attained  puberty  (which  will  be  at 
the  age  of  13  to  18.)  These  are  also  very  rare 
exceptions,  and  I  do  not  believe  that  any  one  of 
my  readers  will  claim  that  these  present  us  any 
pleasing  and  ennobling  pictures. 

These  observations  show  us  that,  under  pres- 
ent conditions,  there  is  positively  no  way  open  to 
the  healthy  young  man  which  will  not  seriously 


injure  him  in  some  manner.  In  these  enumerations 
I  was  thinking  of  Freethinkers -only.  Of  course 
Christians  would  have  to  be  classified  the  same 
way,  but  "it  cannot  be  denied  that  for  the  truly 
religions  man  there  are  some  relieving  considera- 
tions in  this  dilemma.  For  him  the  lusty  desire 
with  which  he  is  tormented,  is  that  awful  "sin  of 
the  flesh,"  invented  by  the  "devil,"  who  has  at  all 
times  endeavored  to  seduce  "weak"  mortals.  The 
minister  will  inform  him  that  "we  are  all  sinners' 
— and  that  must  be  a  great  consolation  to  him ; 
when  he  confesses  his  "sin"  to  the  priest  he  will  be 
told  that  nearty  all  young  men  are  tormented  by 
this  "lust  of  the  flesh",  but  that  with  humble  con- 
fession, frequent  prayers,  and  the  strong  and 
sincere  effort  of  resistance  he  may  still  be  a  good 
and  pious  man.  This  will  save  him  from  losing 
his  self-respect,  and  will  give  him  the  necessary 
courage  and  self-reliance  to  guard  against  excess. 
I  ask  you,  Freethinkers,  to  whom  do  your 
young  men  go  for  advice  in  their  secret  troubles? 
Can  you  deny  that  the  young  Catholics  are  better 
situated  in  this  respect?  They  confess  to  their 
priests  and  these  are  generally  smart  men,  who 
"know  the  world"  and  who  can  give  them  better 
advice  than  the  young  Freethinker  can  got  from 
the  family  doctor-book  or  the  "Youth's  Friend"  of 
the  quack.  But  suppose  that  he  should  come  to 
you,  that  he  should  ask  your  leaders  for  informa- 
tion— what  advice  will  they  give  to  the  hale  and 
healthy  youth  of  nineteen  or  twenty,  whose  vigor 
and  buoyanc}'  demand  an  outlet  for  his  natural 


—  35  — 

impulses?  Will  they  say,  "marry"  and  be  indiffer- 
ent to  the  bitter  smile  of  the  young  man,  who  can 
barely  support  himself,  or — (if  he  should  be  one  of 
the  few  financially  able  to  marry) — who  has  not 
yet  found  that  "superior  being"  who  could  make 
*he  thought  of  binding  himself  forever  appear 
agreeable?  If  they  are  pressed  very  hard  for  a 
definite  answer,  they  will  expound  their  theory  of 
general  government  (be  it  initiative  and  refer- 
endum, Single-Tax.  Socialism,  or  Anarchy)  and 
say  thus:  Let  us  better  our  economic  conditions, 
then  you  will  be 'all-right,  then  every  youth  and 
every  maiden  who  loves  can  promptly  marry 
(many  are  bold  enough  even  to  add:  "and  un- 
marry  when  they  cease  to  love")  without,  being- 
hindered  by  any  economic  considerations!  Un- 
fortunately, these  reforms  cannot  be  brought 
about  in  a  day  or  two.  Hence  the  advice  is  not 
advice  at  all,  and  our  disappointed  youth  leaves 
with  a  sad  face  and  "sneaks  through"  as  smoothly 
as  circumstances  will  allow. 

Suppose  now,  that  you,  dear  reader,  should 
firmly  believe  in  any  one  of  the  above  theories; 
would  you  not  concede  at  once  that  we  will  need 
able  and  honest  men,  full  of  strength,  courage  and 
perseverance,  to  bring  about  the  desired  change? 
Let  me  ask  you  a  question:  How  can  you  expect 
ever  to  get  the  necessary  number  of  such  men  to- 
gether so  long  as  foolish  superstitions  force  al- 
most every  one  of  them  at  times  to  play  the  part 
of  a  miserable  hypocrite,  sneak,  and  liar? 


—  36  — 

How  beautifully  these  dreary  pictures  will  be 
transformed  in  free  society!  Before  the  time  of 
puberty  sexual  subjects  will  have  only  the  same 
interest  for  the  boy  that  any  other  lesson  for 
study  has,  as  they  will  no  longer  be  tempting 
* 'forbidden  fruit."  After  he  has  reached  sexual 
maturity,  he  will  promptly  be  conscious  of  a 
strong  desire  for  sexual  intercourse  and  will  wish 
to  satisfy  the  same  in  the  most  agreeable  manner, 
that  is,  with  a  sympathetic  human  being  of  the 
opposite  sex.  As  almost  all  the  women  will  have 
the  same  wish  and  as  he  will  be  free  to  choose  from 
all  of  them,  without  the  least  danger  of  interfering 
with  any  right  or  claim  to  any  one  of  them,  with- 
out the  danger  of  losing  his  liberty  by  the  associa- 
tion, it  may  appear  extremely  easy  to  gain  his  ob- 
ject. But  the  other  men  will  have  the  same  desires 
and  the  same  rights  and  the  sexes  are  fairly  equal 
in  number,  hence  it  will  be  necessary  for  our  young 
man  to  exert  himself  to  gain  the  affection  of  a 
woman.  The  necessity  of  such  wooing  will  keep  the 
youth  from  indulgence  before  the  full  development 
of  his  sexual  nature.  The  impulse  must  have 
grown  sufficiently  strong  to  urge  him  to  vigorous 
action,  to  the  ardent  and  persistent  wooing  with- 
out which  he  would  have  but  little  chance  of  suc- 
cess. In  free  society  ouanism  will  not  be  called  a 
crime,  no,  not  even  a  vice;  it  will  be  described 
simply  as  that  satisfaction  Avhich  gives  the  least 
pleasure  and  is  most  likely  to  cause  harm.  Unless 
he  has  lost  all  faith  in  himself  no  youth  will  ever 
think  of  satisfying  his  desire  in  this  manner,  he  will 


—  37  — 

leave  that  to  the  world-despising  recluse  and  the 
blunt-witted  idiot.  Neither  will  he  think  of  buying 
the  service  of  a  woman  for  the  purpose.  Why  not? 
For  the  reasons  that  the  pleasures  received  would 
be  so  much  less,  and  because  he  would  dread  the 
derision  of  his  comrades,  who  would  pity  him  for 
the  inability  to  gain  love  by  his  personal  qualities. 
Hence  he  will  soon  find  a  sympathetic  woman, 
whose  spontaneous  desire  meets  his  own.  AH  free 
human  beings  they  will  enjoy  love's  delights  with- 
out any  false  sense  of  shame,  witliout  self-reproach, 
without  concern  for  the  future,  without  being 
forced  to  any  enslaving  "relation''  and— what  is 
not  at  all  unimportant — without  having  their 
pleasure  disturbed  by  any  artificially  cultivated 
feeling  of  aversion  to  and  disgust  for  the  sexual 
function.  Realizing  the  high  degree  of  pleasure 
which  this  function  affords  them,  they  cannot  fail 
to  think  it  beautiful,  and  \\illprizetherespective 
parts  of  their  bodies  as  noble  organs,  well  worthy 
of  tender  care  and  attention.  Their  true  sense  of 
shame  will  keep  them  from  ever  mentioning  these 
organs  or  their  functions  with  the  spiteful  scorn 
and  disdain  which  is  customary  to-day,  and  they 
would  treat  the  man  who  would  dare  speak  thus 
as  a  contemptible  weakling  or  eunuch. 

I  suppose  it  is  high  time  to  reassure  the 
anxious  souls  who  will  ask.  "What  of  the  children, 
the  necessary  results  of  these  relations?'' 

Well,  in  all  the  lowerclasses  of  animals  impreg- 
nation would  probably  always  be  the  "necessary 
result,"  but  as  we  happen  to  belong  to  the  highest 


—  38  — 

class  and  are  endowed  with  intellect,  we  are  not 
satisfied  to  let  "instinctive"  passion  govern  us,  but 
have  exerted  our  mental  energy  in  all  spheres  to 
get  the  natural  forces  under  our  control  and  to 
use  them  to  suit  our  own  purpose.  Even  the  sexual 
organs  and  their  functions  have  not  been  too 
"sacred"  to  be  exempt  from  the  scrutinizing  in- 
vestigation of  our  students,  and  so  they  found, 
many  years  ago,  that  even  these  "forces"  and 
their  effects  need  not  be  ruled  either  by  the  will  of 
God  or  of  non-intellectual  nature,  but  can  be  made 
subject  to  the  will  of  man !  (very  much  to  the  dis- 
pleasure of  priest  and  statesman,  as  it  seems.) 

.1  refer  to  the  preventive  check,  to  which  I  have 
concluded  to  devote  the  next  chapter. 


V. 
The  Preventive  Check. 


TN  a  discussion  ou  this  subject  I  had  a  good 
hearty  laugh  at  the  inconsistency  of  a  man, 
who  claimed  to  be  highly  educated,  who  demanded 
continence  from  men,  who  adored  vestals,  but  who 
was  opposed  to  the  preventive  check,  "because  it 
is  unnatural!" 

To  call  enforced  continence  "natural"  is  too 
absurd  an  assertion  to  require  any  argumenta- 
tion. I  suppose,  however,  that  it  would  have  to 
be  termed  natural  if  we  simply  followed  our  "in- 
stincts" and  procreated  as  many  human  beings  as 
possible.  But  nature  has  likewise  given  us  intellect 
and  it  must  seem  but  natural  to  use  this  also. 

If  we  use  it  to  influence  the  people  to  blindly 
ignore  a  law  of  nature,  which  has  been  known  for 
thousands  of  years,  if  we  use  it  in  an  effort  to  arti- 
ficially and  forcibly  suppress  a  natural  impulse, 
which  engenders  love,  and  the  satisfaction  of  which 
causes  pleasure  and  joy — then  I  call  this  utterly 
foolish  and  the  resulting  actions — unnatural,  or 
anti-natural,  mystic,  theological. 


—  40  — 

If,  however,  we  use  our  intellectual  faculties  to 
gain  knowledge  of  as  many  as  possible  of  the- 
never-changing  laws  of  nature,  if  we  utilize  this 
knowledge  to  the  best  of  our  ability  for  a  happy 
and  healthy  development  of  the  human  race — then 
I  call  this  good  and  wise  and  natural. 

But.  my  excellent  man  has  another  reason  for 
his  objection  to  preventive  checks.  He  says  that 
with  them  we  "frustrate  the  will  and  intention  of 
nature,"  and  winds  up  with  the  grand  words:  "It 
won't  do  to  try  to  fool  nature!" 

I  answer  thus:  "As  A*OU  dare  to  give  us  a 
theory  of  the  intentions  of  nature,  I  will  take  the 
same  liberty.  Here  is  my  theory :  Mother  Nature's 
first  intention  was  to  give  to  humanity  no  more 
reproductive  power  than  was  just  sufficient  for  the 
preservation  and  a  healthy  development  of  the 
race;  but  she  happened  to  have  a  vivid  dream, 
which  gave  her  a  presentiment  of  the  strange  and 
crazy  notions  which  Christian  and  other  priests 
might  try  to  force  on  poor  mankind,  and  she  solil- 
oquized thus:  "Ah,  you  may  be  smart  men,  but  it 
won't  do  to  try  to  fool  me!  I  will  frustrate  your 
intentions!  I  will  give  to  humanity  such  a  super- 
abundance of  reproductive  power,  I  will  make  the 
sexual  impulse  so  strong  and  its  gratification  so 
delicious,  that  all  your  promises  of  eternal  bliss  as 
a  reward  for  so-called  'purity,'  all  your  curses  of 
the  'awful  desire  of  the  flesh,'  all  your  menacing* 
with  the  tortures  of  hell,  all  your  persecutions  and 
punishments  on  earth  (with  the  assistance  of  legal 
tyrants  and  legal  courts) — will  not  extinguish  it. 


-  41  - 

nor  even  regulate  it  to  suit  your  purposes !  If  they 
should  happen  to  have  such  an  immense  super- 
fluity of  it  then  that  they  will  use  the  greater  part 
of  it  for  their  pleasure  only — well,  what  of  it!  My 
object  is  attained,  I  will  not  begrudge  them  the 
extra  pleasure!''  I  think  we  two  ought  to  be  very 
thankful  to  old  Mother  Nature  for  changing  her 
mind ;  if  she  had  carried  out  her  first  plan,  we  two 
would  not  be  here  to  enter  into  such  a  pretty  de- 
bate on  the  question  :  "What  was  her  intention?" 
The  above  is  a  translation  of  the  only  argu- 
ment against  the  objection  to  preventives  which  is 
contained  in  my  German  book.  One  of  my  critics, 
to  whom  I  had  sent  the  manuscript  before  publi- 
cation, wrote  to  me  as  follows :  "I  heartily  enjoyed 
your  splendid  answers  to  the  'highly  educated 
man,'  but  this  subject  is  of  such  vast  importance 
that  you  should  have  devoted  a  special  chapter 
and  more  serious  argumentation  to  it.  The  most 
absurd  superstitions  in  regard  to  the  prevention 
of  conception  are  still  prevalent  in  the  minds  of 
many  of  our  most  radical  thinkers."  Unfortunately, 
I  did  not  heed  the  advice.  I  thought  that  these 
superstitions  were  due  only  to  the  fact  that  those 
who  held  them  had  given  but  very  little  thought 
to  the  subject  and  that,  once  realizing  the  immense 
value  and  importance  of  the  preventive,  they 
would  promptly  and  easily  conquer  this  weakness. 
Alas !  I  was  mistaken,  for  everywhere  I  meet  these 
foolish  scruples,  this  dread  of  scheming  and  re- 
vengeful nature! 


To  some  poetic  minds,  perceiving  the  grandeur 
and  the  bea.utiful  harmony  of  the  universe,  it  may 
give  pleasure  to  draw  an  entrancing  picture  of  the 
origin  and  the  original  intentions  regarding  all 
this;  it  may  suit  their  fancy  to  imagine  a  god  or  a 
thousand  gods  and  goddesses  as  ruler  or  rulers — 
but,  aside  from  the  pleasure  of  a  fantastic  dream, 
or  the  embellishment  of  our  language  with  fine  alle- 
gorical phrases,  such  illusions  can  have  no  value. 
AVe  are  all  convinced  that  the  laws  of  nature  are 
eternal  and  forever  unchangeable,  that  the  same 
cause  will  always  have  the  same  effect.  From  this 
it  follows  that,  whatever  the  ori^iunl  intention 
may  have  been,  at  the  time  when  these  eternal 
laws  are  supposed  to  have  been  introduced,  after 
they  were  once  introduced  any  further ''will''  of  the 
maker  of  the  laws  (call  him  or  it  God,  Nature, 
Devil  or  whatever  else  you  please)  i«  simply 
meaningless — hence  we  sa}',  "Nature  has  no  inten- 
tions!'' Furthermore,  as  it  is  utterly  impossible 
for  us  to  conceive  of  any  such  "beginning,"  of  any 
making  of  such  laws,  we  must  believe  that  the 
eternity  of  these  laws  extends  both  ways  and  so 
we  promptly  add,  "and  it  never  had  any  either!" 
Have  you  ever  thought  of  it,  what  a  ludicrous 
absurdity  it  is  for  a  man  to  firmly  believe  in  the 
eternal  immutability  of  nature's  laws  (all  Free- 
thinkers and  a  great  percentage  of  the  Christians 
do  believe  this)  and  at  the  same  time  fear  the 
"revenge  of  nature  for  frustrating  its  intentions?" 

If  a  river  does  not  flow  in  a  direction  to  suit 
our  purposes,  we  change  its  course;  if  a  hill  or 


—  43  — 

mountain  is  hindering  us,  we  simply  shovel  it 
away,  and  we  would  laugh  at  the  fool  who  should 
seek  to  scare  us  with  the  ominous  remark  that  we 
were  "frustrating  the  intention  of  nature!'' Several 
centuries  ago.  when  a  new  enterprise  in  any  field 
was  considered,  many  people  were  afraid  of  the 
venture  because  it  might  interfere  with  the  will  of 
the  Creator.  We  "civilized"  people  have  outgrown 
these  superstitions— except  when  it  comes  to  our 
own  body:  there  we  are  still  trembling  with  the 
same  old  fear.  To  a  great  extent  our  doctors  of 
medicine  are  to  blame  for  this;  so  many  of  them 
still  like  to  use  the  expression,  ''acting  against  the 
will  of  nature.*'  Of  course  I  am  well  aware  of  the 
fact  that  most  of  them  really  mean  nothing  else 
by  this  than  "acting*  in  ignorance  of  the  laws  of 
nature.''  but  it  would  be  wise  to  beware  of  such 
false  expressions  as  the  former :  the  example  of  the 
highly  educated  man  mentioned  before  shows  us 
to  what  ridiculous  delusions  this  may  lead  men 
and  women. 

After  having  reassured  ourselves  that  no  will- 
ful revenge  of  nature  is  to  be  dreaded,  the  question 
of  the  necessity  or  expediency  of  a  preventive 
check  is  in  order. 

Ninety  years  ago  Thomas  R.  Malthus  explained 
to  the  world  how  over-abundantly  nature  has 
endowed  almost  every  organic  being.  He  proved 
to  us  that  with  free  and  unchecked  opportunity 
for  development  a  single  species  could  soon  cover 
the  entire  earth:  furthermore,  that,  if  the  species 
of  man  should  use  its  entire  reproductive  power 


—  44  — 

without  forcibly  limiting  its  resulting  numbers, 
very  soon  there  would  not  be  nourishment  enough 
to  furnish  them  all  more  than  a  meager  sub- 
sistence. Whatever  opinion  you  may  have  of  the 
conclusions  drawn  from  them  by  Malthas,  you  will 
have  to  admit  the  correctness  of  these  premises.  I 
certainly  do  not  claim  that  there  are  any  too 
many  human  beings  in  this  world  at  present — no, 
we  even  have  plenty  of  room  for  more — but  I  do 
claim  that  this  favorable  circumstance  is  not 
traceable  to  any  destructive  struggle  with  ''other 
classes  of  animals"  (this  secures  a  certain  equilib- 
rium in  the  lower  classes,  but  the  human  race  has 
attained  such  a  superiority  that  this  fight  causes 
comparatively  hardly  any  losses  on  its  side);  that 
it  is  not  due  to  any  particular  weakness  of  the  re- 
productive instinct,  but  that  we  owe  it  merely  to 
the  fact  that  the  human  race  has  at  all  times 
forcibly  limited  its  numbers  by  a  great  variety  of 
"natural"  and  "unnatural"  checks.  Therefore,  I 
further  claim  that  the  question  before  us  is  not  by 
any  means  whether  we  shall  limit  population  or 
not,  for  we  have  always  done  so  and  will  and  must 
do  so  in  future;  the  question  to  decide  is  simply 
this :  Which  is  the  best  check? 

Herewith  I  give  you  a  list  of  the  "checks" 
which  are  in  vogue  at  present:  War,  pestilence, 
poverty,  famine,  crime  and  its  punishment,  still- 
births, disease  caused  by  pre-natal  influences,  neg- 
lect of  children,  abortion,  and — what  is  probably 
more  effective  than  all  the  others  taken  together — 


-  45  — 

excess,  perversity,  and  secret  vice  on  the  one  side, 
and  enforced  continence  on  the  other. 

Many  diverse  propositions  are  made  for  bet- 
tering the  condition  of  human  society,  but  every 
humane  person  will  promptly  concede  that  each  of 
the  above-named  checks,  with  the  exception  of  the 
last  one,  continence,  is  an  evil  and  should  be  eradi- 
cated. Hence  to  many  minds  continence  remains 
as  the  one  and  only  permissible  check.  "We  propose 
instead  the  preventive  check,  that  is,  full  gT-atifica- 
tion  of  the  impulse  in  a  natural  and  normal  man- 
ner, but  with  the  use  of  scientific  means  for  pre- 
venting conception  wherever  the  latter  is  not  de- 
sired, and  we  claim  that  each  and  every  fact  and 
argument  which  could  possibly  be  wortiry  of  con- 
sideration speaks  in  favor  of  our  check. 

Seeing  now  that,  for  every  logical  thinker,  the 
question  is  reduced  to  the  single  choice  of  Con- 
tinence or  the  Preventive  Check  (all  other  checks 
having  been  rejected  as  evils  by  unanimous  vote) 
it  must  seem  that  it  was  hardly  necessary  to 
argue  the  question  of  "nature's  intentions",  for  he 
must  be  foolish  indeed  who  could  consider  con- 
tinence "more  natural'',  or  who  could  hold  that 
nature  invented  a  certain  instinct  or  impulse  for 
the  purpose  of  having  it  suppressed. 

But  let  us  stop  these  foolish  quibbles  about 
what  nature  intended  and  investigate  instead  the 
laws  of  nature  that  have  relation  to  our  subject: 

1.  Every  important  organ  of  our  body  after 
its  full  development  manifests  a  need  for  activity, 
and  a  continued  neglect  or  suppression  of  the  im- 


—  46  — 

pulse  is  always  certain  to  cause  a  serious  irrita- 
tion of  the  entire  system. 

2.  Regular   use   of   any  one  of   our    organs 
strengthens  it ;  within  certain  limits,  the  more  it  is 
used  1he  greater  its  capacity  becomes.    Up  to  a 
certain  degree  this  will  be  truly  beneficial  to  the 
entire  body.    After  this  stage  is  passed,  the  "ex- 
cessive use"  will  necessitate  an  extraordinary  de- 
velopment of  the  organ.  Nature  promptly  tries  to 
rise  to  the  emergency,  even  if  other  organs  must 
be  neglected  on  that  account;  but,  as  all  of  our 
organs  are  closely  allied  to  and  dependent  upon 
each  other,    continued    persistence   in  undue  de- 
mands on  one  organ  (that  is,  over-exertion)  must 
bring  on  a  sudden  collapse  because  other  gradually 
debilitated  organs  will  finally  fail  to  render  the  ne- 
cessary support. 

3.  Non-use  debilitates   the   organ    and    also 
gradually  weakens  the  impulse  of  activity  after 
the  crisis  is  passed.    This  crisis,  the  physical  irri- 
tation of  the  entire  system  caused  by  resisting  the 
craving  for  activity  of  an  organ,  will  last  only 
until    nature   has    had    time  to  conform  to  the 
circumstance. 

4.  Healthy  living  means  therefore  a  normal 
and  regular  exercise  of  all  organs  of  the  body.    It 
is  just  as  absurd  to  suppose  that  inactivity  of 
f ully  developed  sexual  organs  might  be  equivalent 
to  a  net  gain  in  physical  power  as  it  would  be  to 
resolve  not  to  exert  the  muscles  of  your  arms  in 
order  to  save  the  strength  which  is  in  them  (for use 
by  some  other  part  of  the  body,  as  the  continence 


—  47  — 

people  would  argue),  or  to  try  to  use  your  brains 
as  little  as  possible  for  a  few  years  in  order  to  be  a, 
wise  man  afterwards ! 

5.  Non-use  of  an  organ,  neglect  of  a  certain 
faculty,  or  the  effort  for  less  than  normal  use,  if 
continued  for  several  generations  in  any  race,  will 
result  in  a  "characteristic' 'peculiarity  of  that  race 
consisting  in  a  general  weakness  of  the  respective 
organ  and  a  general  lack  of  its  full  development. 
Example:  The  "civilized"  human  races  are  par- 
ticularly "weak  and  inferior"  beings  so  far  as  the 
sense  of  smell  is  concerned,  for  the  simple  reason 
that  they  have  sorely  neglected  for  many  centuries 
the  intelligent  use  of  their  nose.  For  some  un- 
civilized tribes  as  well  as  for  all  animals  this  organ 
is  of  immense  importance  for  their  guidance  and 
safety,  while  our  race,  depending  more  upon  its. 
higher  intelligence,  did  not  need  it  so  much,  and 
hence  it  now  appears  to  many  of  us  as  a  rather 
superficial  ornament,  which  causes  us  more  annoy- 
ance than  pleasure  or  benefit.  We  did  not  use  it 
and  so  it  came  to  pass  that  it  is  of  no  use. 

Sections  three  and  five  are  apparently  favor- 
able to  the  theory  of  those  men  and  women  who 
wish  to  exterminate  sexual  desire  as  nearly  as 
possible  in  order  to  make  continence  easier  and  to 
see ure "morality"  and  "purity,"  but  these  persons 
should  not  forget  that,  excepting  the  desire  for 
food  and  drink,  the  sexual  desire  is  the  strongest 
impulse  in  human  nature.  The  "crisis"  in  this  case 
would  be  a  rather  long  and  troublesome  one. 
However,  there  is  another  law  of  nature  •\vhk-h 


—  48  — 

•should  cause  every  humane  thinker  to  promptly 
reject  this  theory : 

6.  The  sexual  organs  are  closely  allied  to  all 
other  organs  of  the  body  and  the  Aveakness  of  the 
former  is  sure  to  have  a  debilitating  effect  on  the 
latter.  An  especially  direct  rapport  exists  between 
the  sexual  organs  and  the  brain  and  the  influence 
of  either  on  the  other  is  very  great  and  of  im- 
mense importance.  A  healthy  condition  and  a 
normal  exercise  of  the  sex-organs  have  a  tendency 
to  create  buoyancy  of  the  spirit,  courage,  power  of 
•endurance,  and  other  very  desirable  qualities  and 
conditions,  while  sexual  weakness  or  the  lack  of 
sexual  desire  will  cause  the  contrary  effects  and 
bring  about  many  other  dreary  results  with  which 
even  the  moralist  would  not  be  pleased. 

The  question  might  be  asked  :  How  much  '"in- 
dulgence" would  be  required  (or  allowed  as  the 
case  may  be)  to  constitute  an  average,  normal 
activity  of  healthy  sex-organs?  I  would  answer: 
In  a  free  society  the  "natural  impulse"  of  the 
organs  wrould  give  each  person  a  pretty  distinct 
and  correct  answer.  Under  favorable  circum- 
stances a  healthy  stomach  will  give  you  very  clear 
and  wise  orders  when  to  eat  and  when  to  stop,  but 
when  you  are  near  starving  half  of  the  time,  when, 
after  a  long  fasting,  you  must  gorge  yourself  with 
all  kinds  of  foul  food,  when  during  all  this  time 
you  see  around  you  a  great  variety  of  tempting- 
delicacies— then  the  "natural  impulse"  will  soon 
become  decidedly  unreliable.  The  existing  un- 
naturally constrained  and  perverse  sexual  con- 


—  49  — 

ditions  have  caused  so  much  abnormal  appetite- 
on  one  side  and  so  much  weakness  and  disgust  on 
the  other,  that  it  is  utterly  impossible  to  draw 
any  reliable  conclusions  from  the  ordinary  per- 
son's observation  and  experience  as  to  what 
might  constitute  an  average  normal  indulgence. 
The  history  of  the  human  race,  however,  as  well  as 
the  study  of  all  other  organic  beings,  can  leave  no 
doubt  in  our  minds  that  it  will  always  beconsider- 
ably  more  than  will  be  necessary  for  the  purpose 
of  propagation.  It  is  possible,  however,  that  some 
of  my  readers  have  not  entered  into  this  study 
and  so  still  have  some  doubts  as  to  this  last- 
assertion;  nevertheless,  they  will  have  to  admit 
that,  in  order  to  regain  a  normal  condition  of  any 
organ,  it  is  an  absolute  necessity  to  give  to  it  an 
opportunity  for  natural  and  normal  activity. 

From  these  considerations  we  must  draw  the 
conclusion  that  continence  is  not  an  advisable 
check,  that  it  is  even  more  disastrous  than  several 
of  the  other  checks  mentioned  in  my  list.  Hence 
there  is  but  one  left — the  Preventive  Check. 

There  are  quite  a  number  of  different  modes  ot 
prevention  known  to-day.  The  study  of  the  opera- 
tions of  nature  will  teach  you  to  choose  that  mode 
which  allows  full  and  mutual  gratification  of  the 
sexual  impulse  in  man  and  woman  in  the  most 
natural  and  beneficial  manner. 

Many  years  ago  human  intelligence  discovered 
simple  means,  which  are  available  to  all, easily  un- 
derstood and  easily  applied,  which  allow  perfect, 
"unchecked,"  natural  and  healthful  activity  to  all 


—  50  — 

sexual  organs  of  man — which  allow  the  same  to 
all  parts  of  the  sexual  organism  of  woman  with 
the  exception  of  the  wonlb — and  which  at  the  same 
time  place  the  decision  of  the  question,  "procrea- 
tion or  no  procreation?''  absolutely  under  the 
control  of  the  independent  woman  or  of  the  hus- 
band and  wife. 

Here  my  opponent  thinks  that  he  has  caught 
me  at  last :  "  'With  the  exception  of  the  womb,'  in- 
deed ! — Why,  the  womb  is  also  an  organ  demand- 
ing activity,  and  you  want  to  prevent  this  activity 
by  unnatural  and  artificial  means!" 

I  must  ask  him  to  remember,  however,  that  we 
have  to  choose  between  the  preventive  check  and 
continence,  and  I  hope  he  will  not  claim  that  the 
latter  gives  any  more  activity  to  the  womb.  If  he 
simply  wishes  to  state  that  we  have  not  reached 
the  ideal  condition  with  the  introduction  of  the 
preventive  check,  that  we  should  strive  to  bring 
about  such  condition,  that  economic  considera- 
tions will  not  prevent  a  single  woman  from  satis- 
fying that  "natural  impulse,"  the  desire  for  ma- 
ternity, then  I  will  promptly  answer,  I  am  with 
you,  once  and  forever! — and  I  am  not  without 
hope  that  we  cair  reach  such  a  state  of  affairs,  for, 
although  convinced  that  even  in  the  ideal  society 
it  would  be  very  unwise  to  increase  population  to 
the  full  extent  of  procreative  power,  that  is,  to 
leave  the  question  of  offspring  entirely  to  the 
"chances"  of  sexual  intercourse,  I  am  confident 
that  it  would  be  the  wisest  and  safest  course  to 


—  51  — 

leave  it  absolutely  and  peremptorily  to  the  desire 
for  maternity. 

But  if  my  opponent  should  mean  to  say  that 
we  should  have  perfection  or  remain  idle,  that  we 
should  either  satisfy  all  of  our  natural  impulses  or 
none  of  them,  then  I  would  promptly  denounce 
him  as  a  fool  and  a  coward,  who  merely  uses  his 
ideal  as  an  excuse  for  his  indolence  and  inactivity. 

What  grand  words  these  moralists  and  con- 
tinence-enthusiasts employ  in  advocacy  of  their 
theories!  "Manly  self-control,"  "superiority  of  the 
spirit  over  the  body/'  "will-power  controlling- the 
base  impulses  of  the  body,''  "the  spiritual  self-con- 
trol of  the  passions  elevates  man  above  the 
beast,*'  are  some  of  their  pet  catch-phrases.  For 
many  hundred  years  humankind  was  tortured 
with  such  teachings,  but  the  suffering  was  some- 
what relieved  by  the  fervent  hope  in  a  better  here- 
after. With  sickening  disgust  we  notice,  however, 
that  Freethinkers,  yes,  even  so-called  "Free- 
Lovers"  thoughtlessly  repeat  such  expressions.  It 
appears  as  a  rather  queer  "elevation,"  indeed, 
when  you  see  that  there  is  not  another  class  of 
animals  on  this  globe  which  is  as  unclean  and  un- 
healthy, debilitated,  degenerated,  and  unhappy 
sexually  as  the  "civilized"  human  races!  Self-con- 
trol is  certainly  a  noble  thing,  when  used  for  a 
noble  purpose.  It  is  beautiful  and  noble  to  use  it 
to  suppress  the  disastrous  feelings  of  hate  and 
revenge ;  it  is  truly  wise  to  use  it  even  to  calm  the 
noble  passions  of  love  and  affection  sufficiently  to 
enable  us  to  consider  intelligently  the  immediate 


—  52  — 

and  remote  consequences  of  possible  actions,  but 
when  we  observe  men  and  women,  who  dare  to  call 
themselves  Freethinkers,  preaching  self-control, 
not  to  gain  strength  and  vigor  of  mind  and  body, 
not  to  gain  joy  and  happiness  for  themselves  and 
others,  but  simply  to  have  the  satisfaction  of 
hearing  the  priests  and  their  flocks  say  of  them 
condescendingly,  "The3r  are  good,  pure  and  moral 
although  they  are  Freethinkers" — that  is  indeed  a 
sad  and  humiliating  spectacle! 

I  will  tell  you  what  will  truly  elevate  us  above 
the  beasts  of  the  field  :  Love  and  enjoy  more  and 
hate  and  kill  less;  never  let  our  "instinctive" 
passions  enslave  us,  but  employ  our  superior- 
mental  power  in  thinking  before  we  act;  refuse  to 
be  satisfied  with  the  "consolation"  that  our  "su- 
perfluous" fellow-beings  will  be  promptly  starved 
and  murdered  in  the  savage  battle  of  life,  and  use 
our  intelligence  to  bring  about  such  a  condition 
that  every  babe  which  henceforth  opens  its  eyes 
to  this  beautiful  world  shall  be  greeted  with  love 
and  delight  as  a  welcome  guest ! 

The  argument  in  this  chapter  on  the  "ne- 
cessity and  expediency"  of  the  preventive  check 
applies  to  the  general  public.  To  the  man  or 
woman  who  favors  the  emancipation  of  woman, 
freedom  in  love,  and  the  cause  of  liberty  in  general, 
the  preventive  check  shows  so  many  other  enorm- 
ous advantages  that  only  a  hopeless  dullard 
could  fail  to  see  them.  It  is  not  necessary  to 
enumerate  them  here. 

The  objections  to  the  check  which  are  not  due 


—  53  — 

to  gross  superstition,  such  as  "inconvenience," 
"offending  the  aesthetic  feeling,"  and  "prosaic  and 
annoying  interference  with  the  ecstasy  of  love,'< 
are  altogether  too  insignificant  compared  with 
the  immense  importance  of  the  subject  and  the 
transcendant  benefits  of  the  check,  to  require  any 
lengthy  argument.  I  can  assure  the  reader  that 
in  less  than  a  month  these  little  difficulties  would 
be  minimized  so  much  in  any  intelligent  "free 
society,''  that  even  the  most  sensitive  nature 
would  not  be  seriously  disturbed  by  them. 

We  are  all  the  slaves  of  custom  to  some  ex- 
tent, but  when  we  are  inspirited  with  enthusiasm 
ior  a  great  and  noble  cause  we  learn  very  quickly 
to  conquer  such  weaknesses. 


VI. 
The  Girls. 

A  FTER  a  rather  long*  digression,  which  I  hope 
some  of  my  readers  will  have  deemed  some- 
what superfluous,  we  will  return  to  the  investiga- 
tion of  present  society,  and-  will  now  consider  the 
sexual  life  of  the  girls.  In  general,  the  dangers  and 
injuries  caused  by  our  present  pernicious  system 
are  the  same  in  the  life  of  the  girls  as  in  that  of 
the  boys,  but  two  important  factors  have  finally 
caused  a  material  difference,  making  separate  con- 
sideration appear  necessary.  1.  The  young  man  is 
expected  to  "go  out  into  the  world,"  while  the 
"ideal  sphere"  of  woman  is  still  the  "home  and 
famiry,"  hence  the  male  child  from  earliest  youth 
is  allowed  considerably  more  freedom  in  his  inter- 
course with  the  outside  world  than  is  the  female. 
Courage  and  energy,  fearless  exploration  and  ex- 
periment, prompt  attack  on  an  enemy — these  are 
ideals  preached  in  some  manner  to  almost  every 
boy,  while  a  certain  degree  of  meekness,  timidity, 
and  bashfulness  are  still  believed  to  belong  among 
the  "graces  of  womanhood."  For  these  reasons  it 
is  far  easier  in  the  case  of  a  girl  to  keep  the 


—  oo  — 


thoughts  removed  from  all  se:;ual  subjects,  to  con- 
sistently foster  the  abhorrence  of  everything  con- 
nected with  sex-life,  than  in  the  case  of  a  boy. 
2.  The  production  and  accumulation  of  seminal 
fluid  in  healthy  young  men  gives  them  such  a 
powerful  and  unmistakable  "explanation"  that 
not  one  of  them  can  for  any  long  time  be  in  doubt 
as  to  "what  he  wants,''  while  the  signs  in  the 
female  organism  are  not  so  explicit. 

These  two  factors  give  us  an  explanation  of 
the  following  fact:  While  the  effort  to  prevent  or 
at  least  to  retard  and  weaken  the  development  of 
sexuality  through  the  medium  of  education  has 
been  a  general  failure  as  far  as  men  are  concerned, 
it  has  been  somewhat  successful  with  quite  a  num- 
ber of  women;  that  is  to  say,  there  are  man}' 
young  maidens,  who  are  not  called  invalids,  who 
are  never  conscious  of  any  desire  for  sexual  inter- 
course. Many  a  woman  reaches  old  age,  sees  her 
children  and  grandchildren  grow  up  without  a 
clear  conception  or  even  knowledge  of  the  sexual 
impulse  and  its  immense  power  and  influence.  As 
she  has  never  enjoyed  the  delights  of  sensual  love 
in  any  worthy  manner,  the  act  may  appear  to  her 
simply  as  a  kind  of  a  "necessary  evil:"  she  may 
denounce  the  men  as  miserable  weaklings  for 
allowing  this  "base"  impulse  to  influence  them  so 
much  in  their  actions.  Her  ignorance  must  make 
her  a  strict  and  stern  moralist. 

Such  a  moralist  must  be  considered  as  an 
honest  and  innocent  ignoramus;  her  accusations 
are  certainly  ridiculous  and  unjust,  but  she  is 


—  56  — 

right  in  one  respect — men  are  miserable  weaklings, 
not  because  "they  are  all  animals!"  (as  such 
women  like  to  say),  but  because  instead  of  open 
and  manly  explanation  they  prefer  silence  and 
active  deceit  in  their  cowardly  dread  of  ghosts 
and  phantoms! 

But  let  us  return  to  the  modern  young  girl, 
who  receives  a  strictly  moral  and  pure  education. 
(Whether  a  Christian  or  a  Freethinker  a,  la  mode, 
the  education  will  be  about  the  same,  except  that 
in  the  latter  case  it  is  even  more  strict  and  stern 
and  is  devoid  of  the  hope  of  reward  and  the  solace 
of  confession  and  atonement.)  It  would  seem  that 
every  mother  must  be  forced  to  some  open  ex- 
planations when  that  distinct  sign  of  beginning 
sex-life,  menstruation,  shows  itself  for  the  first 
time;  but  no,  she  will  simply  say,  "Never  mind, 
every  girl  must  suffer  that."  She  will  give  some 
superficial  advice  regarding  the  treatment  of  the 
body  during  the  time  and  will  see  to  it  that  the 
"sense  of  shame"  keeps  her  girl  from  letting  others 
know  about  her  condition,  or  inquiring  of  others 
concerning  the  disquieting  mystery. 

Well,  our  modest  young  girl  is  thoroughly 
ashamed  that  she  has  such  "vile"  parts  with  such 
"vile"  functions,  and  the  least  allusion  to  any 
sexual  subject  will  bring  the  blush  of  confusion  to 
her  cheeks  and  fill  her  with  horror  and  disgust. 
Thanks  to  the  care  and  vigilance  of  loving- 
parents,  she  will  remain  a  "pure"  and  "moral" 
girl,  blessed  with  all  the  "graces  of  true  woman- 
hood." 


—  57  — 

But  if  she  is  fairly  healthy  the  natural  impulse 
is  bound  to  show  itself  in  some  inexplicable  man- 
ner. The  young  maiden  notices  a  strange  change 
in  her  feelings  towards  the  male  sex,  men's  society 
begins  to  have  a  peculiar  charm  for  her;  she  is 
crazy  for  novels  and  love-stories;  she  is  an  enthu- 
siastic admirer  of  the  amorous  songs  of  our  great 
poets;  in  short,  she  is  craving  for  love  without 
having  the  least  understanding  of  what  that  word 
implies.  What  a  strange  and  prickling  sensation 
it  will  cause  her  when  she  reads  in  her  favorite 
novel  such  passages  as  the  following:  "A  mysteri- 
ous charm  seemed  to  work  upon  her — he  treated 
her  shamefully  and  she  once  thought  she  hated 
him;  she  did  not  agree  with  his  ideas,  did  not 
approve  of  his  actions— and  yet,  a  'mysterious 
and  inexplicable  something'  seemed  to  draw  her  to 
him,  and  when  he  looked  at  her  so  longingly  a 
sweet  tremor  would  pass  through  her  body  and 
thrill  her  with  strangely  agreeable  sensations: 
finally  she  confessed  to  herself:  It  is  love,  sweet 
powerful  love,  of  which  our  poets  sing!''  And  when 
the  crisis  of  the  story  is  reached,  the  declaration  of 
love,  the  ardent  embrace,  the  glowing  kisses — then 
our  young  reader  will  also  feel  a  sweet  tremor 
passing  through  her  body  and  she  will  be  con- 
scious of  a  great  longing  for  such  happiness  as 
this! 

How  we  would  shock  her  if  we  should  tell  her 
the  truth ! — if  we  should  inform  her  that  the  cause 
of  all  this  beautiful  love  is  simply  that  which  to 
her  is  the  lowest,  meanest,  and  most  disgusting  of 


—  58  — 

all  things,  sexuality ;  that  without  such  sexuality 
this  ardent  embrace,  these  burning  kisses,  would 
not  have  been  possible!" 

"Ah,  happy  dreams  of  youth !  Who  could  be  so 
cruel  as  to  rob  sweet  innocence  of  her  beautiful 
illusions?"  That  will  be  your  exclamation,  but 
you  know  very  well  that,  in  spite  of  all  your  care 
and  vigilance,  it  will  happen  sometimes  that  a 
sudden  flash  of  light  will  disclose  the  truth  and 
blast  the  fond  hopes  of  a  happy  and  confiding 
maiden.  The  bitter  contempt  of  the  world  which 
this  must  arouse  in  every  girl  who  has  received  a 
"moral"  education  will  lead  her  in  one  of  the 
following  directions :  She  may  decide  that,  as  love 
is  but  an  illusion,  it  is  best  to  make  use  of  this 
"base"  desire  to  gain  immediate  material  benefit; 
she  will  promptly  set  a  price  on  each  of  her 
"favors."  Or,  she  may  be  calculating  enough,  to 
make  good  use  of  this  "foolish  passion"  of  men, 
while  deciding  to  think  of  the  future  also;  she 
wants  maintenance  and  good  security  for  life;  so 
she  turns  into  a  scheming  coquette,  and  catches  a 
rich  husband.  Or,  again,  she  simply  submits  be- 
cause she  can  see  no  way  out  and  becomes  a  sour 
old  maid,  who  curses  this  "wicked  world."  With 
a  still  different  temperament,  she  may  be  filled 
with  an  immense  pity  for  all  unhappy  sinners,  and 
so  resigns  wealth  and  pleasure,  chooses  "charity" 
as  her  work  in  life,  and  tries  to  make  resignation 
easier  for  others.  Or,  once  more,  she  becomes  in- 
fatuated with  the  "new  idea;"  she  feels  that  the 
"spiritual  influence  of  pure  women  must  elevate 


—  59  — 

these  vicious  men;"  she  is  transformed  into  a 
'•Reformer"  filled  with  new  delusions. 

Although  such  cases  as  this  are  not  at  all 
rare,  yet  they  may  be  called  exceptions,  for  the 
reason  that  almost  all  the  literature  which  treats 
of  love  and  which  is  accessible  to  our  moral  young 
girl,  is  so  written  as  not  to  furnish  any  intelligible 
comment,  and  also  because,  in  spite  of  the  "new 
woman,"  circumstances  are  still  quite  favorable 
for  keeping  girls  blindfolded  in  this  respect. 

Hence  the  majority  of  girls  are  allowed  to  en- 
joy their  illusions  for  quite  a  while.  Of  course 
occasional  glimpses  behind  the  scenes  cannot  be 
prevented ;  the  newspapers,  "town  talk"  and  court 
proceedings  will  now  and  then  give  our  young  girl 
illustrations  of  the  power  of  the  sexual  passion, 
but  if  it  does  not  happen  too  often,  her  confidence 
will  not  be  shaken  and  she  will  keep  on  hoping 
and  longing  for  that  good  and  beautiful,  that 
ideal  man,  who  can  be  an  ardent  lorer  without 
soiling  himself  with  such  "nasty"  thoughts!  The 
most  fortunate  circumstance  which  can  be  imag- 
ined is  that  in  due  time,  while  she  is  yet  in  the  full 
vigor  of  youth  and  health,  she  will  find  and  win 
her  "mate,"  where  that  "inexplicable  something" 
is  present  on  both  sides,  and  is  combined  with  mu- 
tual esteem,  harmony  in  ideas  and  sympathies, 
and  unity  of  interests.  Later  on  I  will  have  oc- 
casion to  prove  that  even  in  such  a  case  the  pres- 
ent moral  code  is  sure  to  be  detrimental  to  their 
future  happiness. 

I  believe  that  «very  reader  will  admit  that 


—  60  — 

these  fortunate  cases  are  also  exceptions.  I  really 
believe  that  most  marriages  are  still  brought 
about  by  the  command  or  at  least  by  the  direct 
or  indirect  influence  of  parents  and  guardians. 
Where  marriage  is  entered  into  through  "free 
choice"  on  both  sides  we  may  find  in  some  cases 
the  necessary  condition  for  a  mutually  beneficial 
association  of  interests,  but  no  sexual  affinity,  so 
that  the  woman  is  in  great  danger  of  having  her 
happiness  wrecked  by  the  necessary  result:  dis- 
gusting and  revolting  sexual  intercourse;  or  it 
may  be  a  regular  "love-match,"  a  strong  sexual 
affinity,  but  with  such  antagonistic  mental  apti- 
tudes and  material  interests  that  harmonious 
association  is  utterly  impossible.  In  most  cases, 
however,  the  girl  has  simply  come  to  the  conclu- 
sion that  she  must  giv7e  up  her  ideals  and  illu- 
sions, that  "Nature"  or  "God"  has  ordained  her 
for  marriage,  that  she  does  not  wish  to  be  an  old 
maid,  that  she  wants  her  own  home,  her  own 
family,  and  somebody  to  "maintain"  and  "pro- 
tect" her  and  them — and  so  she  promptly  accepts 
the  first  respectable  young  man  who  proposes,  if 
he  does  not  happen  to  be  altogether  too  repulsive 
to  her.  In  order  to  make  it  slightly  less  prosaic, 
to  give  a  little  poetic  flavor  to  the  occasion,  sho 
will  try  her  best  to  "fall  in  love"  with  her  si11' tor  as 
much  as  possible.  I  assert  that  the  majority  of  the 
so-called  happy  marriages  of  to-day  originate  in 
this  manner — they  are  entered  into  with  fewer  illu- 
sions and  hence  bring  less  of  disappointment. 

In  general  the  sex-life  of  young  women  as  com- 


—  61  — 

pared  with  that  of  young'  men  shows  us  the  follow- 
ing: Less  self-abuse,  less  illicit  sexual  intercourse 
(that  is,  a  less  number  of  women  than  men 
".sinning"  in  that  manner)  and — as  a  self-evident 
result — more  real  continence.  As  the  abstinent- 
life  is  the  only  life  which  i&  consistent  with  present 
moral  beliefs,  it  does  not  endanger  self-respect  and 
honesty  and  truthfulness  of  character,  but  the 
study  of  the  laws  of  nature  cannot  leave  any 
doubt  in  our  minds  that  it  must  bring  many 
other  dangers  to  health  of  body  and  mind.  If  the 
tendency  to  the  development  of  the  sex-nature  has 
been  successfully  checked,  so  that  there  is  no 
sexual  impulse,  or  if  it  is  so  weak  that  its  sup- 
pression causes  no  trouble,  then  it  will  be  found 
that  the  weakness  of  one  part  has  resulted  in  or  is 
accompanied  by  weakness  of  other  important 
parts;  that  it  has  checked  with  equal  success  the 
formation  of  many  characteristics  of  mind  and 
body  which  are  essential  to  the  true  beauty  of 
womanhood  Jf,  on  the  other  hand,  the, perverse 
education  has  resulted  in  a  premature  or  an  un- 
duly strong  development  of  the  sex-nature,  or  if 
this  development  has  been  normal,  then  the  im- 
pulse will  be  strong  and  the  forcible  suppression  of 
it  must  bring  real  disease.  In  that  famous  book, 
"The  Elements  of  Social  Science,"  written  by  an 
English  physician,  which  has  had  an  immense  cir- 
culation and  has  been  translated  into  all  modern 
languages,  the  author  gives  us  a  graphic  descrip- 
tion of  the  many  disorders,  ailments,  and  diseases 
of  woman,  caused  by  continence.  He  claims  that 


—  62  — 

every  good  physician,  who  has  the  courage  to  tell 
the  truth,  will  promptly  admit  that  moderate 
sexual  activity  would  be  the  best,  yes,  the  only, 
remedy  for  many  of  the  prevalent  diseases  of 
women. 

It  is  not  necessary,  however,  to  study  the 
"Elements"  in  order  to  learn  this  truth.  Any  in- 
telligent person  who  is  willing  to  see  it  must  see  it. 
I  do  not  believe  that  any  of  my  readers  are  "inno- 
cent" enough  to  presume  that  marriage  results  in 
"moderate  sexual  intercourse" — it  generally  means 
but  the  sudden  change  from  enforced  continence  to 
enforced  excess — nevertheless,  many  cases  have 
been  observed  of  women  above  twenty  to  whom 
marriage  has  brought  a  sudden  remarkable  in- 
crease of  health  and  vigor. 

Serious  difficulties  confront  us  every wheio  in 
the  education  of  girls,  and  I  challenge  our  "moral'' 
Freethinkers  to  point  out  a  way  which  may  be 
chosen  without  bringing  great  danger  to  the 
health  and  happiness  of  the  young  woman.  If  a 
strict  and  stern  moral  education  is  somewhat  suc- 
cessful \ve  will  weaken  or  destroy  an  impulse  which 
is  essential  to  a  beautiful  development  of  the 
woman,  and  wre  will  rob  her  of  a  great  part  of  her 
chances  to  marry  a  congenial  man.  We  must 
dread  that,  sooner  or  later,  a  sudden  knowledge  of 
the  truth  will  cause  her  to  despise  the  world  and 
drive  her  into  one  of  the  dreary  ways  already  de- 
scribed. If  we  allow  her  to  revel  in  all  kinds  of 
erotic  poetry,  novels,  and  love-stories,  visionary, 
erroneous  ideas  of  the  relations  of  men  and  women 


—  63  — 

be  the  result,  which  will  make  it  impossible  for 
her  to  judge  men  correctly,  and  is  very  liable  to 
leave  her  the  easy  victim  of  the  arch-hypocrite  or 
force  her  into  embittered  old-maidenship  through 
the  fading  of  foolish  and  unrealizable  illusions.  If 
we  prohibit  all  such  literature  and  try  to  keep  her 
thoughts  centered  at  all  times  on  prosaic  reality, 
we  will  rob  her  of  that  charm  and  bliss  of  youth, 
the  faithful  hope  of  future  love  and  happiness,  and 
she  may  turn  out  to  be  but  a  cold-hearted  money- 
seeking  machine. 

But  suppose  we  should  not  follow  the  example 
of  the  majority;  suppose  we  should  not  exert  our- 
selves to  cover  all  sexual  things  with  mud  and 
filth  in  order  to  keep  "sweet  innocence*'  from 
touching  them  until  the  redeeming  angel  makes 
his  appearance,  in  the  person  of  the  welcome 
suitor;  suppose  we  should  let  her  education  and 
training  be  somewhat  freer  and  more  natural — or 
that  we  should  be  simply  perfectly  silent  on  the 
subject — or  that  we  should  be  honest  and  truthful 
with  the  child  from  earliest  youth.  Then  we  may 
expect  a  natural  and  normal  development  of  the 
sexual  organism,  which  in  due  time  will  create  a 
strong  sexual  impulse.  This  may  result  under 
favorable  circumstances  in  an  early  marriage 
through  a  passionate  "love-match,"  but,  alas, 
almost  all  such  love-matches  end  in  misery,  for  the 
simple  reason  that  sensual  passion  is  not  by  any 
means  the  best  basis  for  a  good  mating  in  the  pres- 
ent marriage  institution,  which  demands  many 
important  factors  besides  sexual  intercourse.  If 


-  64- 

iio  early  marriage  takes  place,  then  the  enforced 
continence  or  unnatural  satisfaction  of  the  desire 
is  sure  to  cause  disease  and  misery — or  the  power- 
ful impulse  finds  in  some  "weak  moments"  its 
most  natural  gratification,  that  is,  with  a  con- 
genial man,  without  having  made  "maintenance 
for  life"  the  condition,  without  having  received  the 
"blessing"  of  a  priest  or  of  the  State.  Well,  in 
this  latter  case  good  neighbors  and  friends  will 
promptly  see  to  it  that  there  be  but  little  happi- 
ness left  in  the  life  of  the  "fallen  woman !" 

What  shall  we  do?  Which  course  shall  we 
take?  The  author  of  "Social  Science"  calls  it  a  sad 
dilemma,  an  awful  labyrinth,  and  from  his  point 
of  view  these  dreary  terms  may  be  somewhat  ex- 
cusable and  even  justifiable;  for  a  true  Freethinker, 
however,  the  way  should  be  clear : 

Liberate  yourselves  from  the  false  morality  of 
the  priests,  which  hinders  you  on  all  sides  in  the 
pursuit  of  true  happiness!  Liberate  yourselves 
from  the  tyrannical  laws  which  oppress  you  every- 
where! Then— and  not  until  then — will  you  be  able 
to  reach  your  ideal  in  education :  "Mens  sana  in 
corpora  sano!"  Then— and  not  until  then — will 
your  children  have  a  chance  to  grow  into  true 
manhood  and  womanhood,  each  with  a  "sound 
mind  in  a  sound  body,"  capable  of  enjoying  this 
life  to  its  full  extent  and  of  giving  lasting  happi- 
ness to  others ! 

In  the  following  pages  it  will  be  my  aim  to 
test  each  and  every  reason  which  might  possibly 
make  such  a  course  appear  fatal  or  dangerous — 


—  65  — 

and  I  hope  and  trust  that  I  shall  be  able  to  dispel 
from  all  logical  minds  those  doubts  and  fears 
\vhich  have  heretofore  caused  them  to  be  anta- 
gonistic to,  or  to  hesitate  in  the  agitation  for 
Freedom  in  Lo  ve ! 


VII 
Love. 


T7REE  LOVE  !  How  could  any  noble  mind  ever 
come  to  hate  these  beautiful  words!  Was 
there  ever  a  bard  who  sang  in  praise  of  enforced 
love?  Is  there  in  all  the  poetry  of  the  world  a 
single  beautiful  idyl  of  love  which  does  not  tell  of 
free  love?  And  yet,  alas,  what  a  strange  reception 
the  world  has  given  to  the  theory  bearing  this 
name! 

A  great  poet  sings  of  the  beauty  of  love  and 
boldly  declares  that  this  sweet  and  powerful  feel- 
ing is  altogether  too  noble  and  vital  to  be  subject 
to  the  tyrannical  compulsion  of  priest  and  legis- 
lator. He  finds  many  enthusiastic  admirers  in  the 
crowd,  who  rave  about  his  glowing  strophes,  but 
when  it  comes  to  acting  in  the  spirit  of  his  affirma- 
tions, thev  promptly  draw  away  trembling  for  the 
"sacredness"  of  their  marriage-institution.  In- 
stead of  practically  accepting  freedom  they  prefer 
to  make  "exceptional  laws''  for  great  poets  and 
artists ! 

Through  sad  experiences  in  wedlock  or  the 
study  of  the  many  unhappy  marriages  everywhere 
observable,  a  man  or  woman  has  come  to  the  con- 


—  67  — 

elusion  that  an  institution  which  is  the  cause  of  so 
much  dreadful  misery  should  be  abolished ;  be- 
cause he  is  opposed  to  marriage  he  calls  himself 
and  is  called  a  free-lover — and  every  person  who 
yet  feels  somewhat  comfortable  at  his  own  fire- 
side promptly  condemns  the  "destroyer  of  home 
and  family!'' 

Another  argues  thus :  The  satisfaction  of  the 
sexual  impulse  is  a  pleasure  tyrannically  denied  to 
many  at  present.  Give  to  every  one  a  chance  to 
enjoy  this  pleasure  and  it  will  be  equivalent  to. an 
increase  of  the  total  of  human  happiness — and 
then  "civilized  society,"  in  which  a  truly  beautiful 
enjoyment  of  this  association  is  a  very  rare  excep- 
tion, failing  to  appreciate  the  value  of  this  argu- 
ment, fights  a.s  before  for  its  marriage  institution, 
which  it  must  believe  to  be  endangered. 

Quite  a  number  of  men  and  women  have  come 
to  the  conclusion  that  the  greatest  possible  free- 
dom of  the  individual,  not  alone  in  love  but  in  all 
other  affairs,  is  not  only  the  best  but  the  only 
means  for  the  eradication  of  existing  evils — but 
these  are  Anarchists!  and  that  word  alone  is  still 
sufficient  to  cause  such  a  confusion  in  the  brains 
of  the  majority  of  the  people,  to  produce  such 
vague  but  horrible  images  of  blood,  dynamite,  and 
torch  in  their  thoughts,  that  sound  reasoning  is 
utterly  impossible  in  their  controversies  with  these 
"extremists." 

And  so  it  comes  to  pass  that,  in  spite  of  their 
many  irrefutable  arguments,  the  Free-Lovers  can 
boast  of  but  little  success,  and  those  beautiful 


—  68  — 

words,  "Free  Love,"  have  been  brought  into  al- 
most general  disrepute. 

In  order  to  understand  what  these  words  im- 
p]y  it  is  necessary,  first  of  all,  to  answer  the 
question:  What  is  love?  Our  eminent  poets  and 
authors  give  us  the  following  answers:  One  of 
them  declares  that  "true  love"  means  "the  spir- 
itual longing  for  an  harmonious  chord  to  your 
Own  scale  of  feelings  and  sensations;"  for  another 
it  is  "the  passionate  appreciation  of  the  truly 
good  and  the  truly  beautiful  in  man  or  woman;" 
a  third  thinks  mainly  of  harmonious  mental  co- 
operation ;  for  the  fourth  it  is  simply  "an  inexpli- 
cable something,  which  must  be  felt  but  cannot  be 
described  ;"  a  fifth  will  admit  that  only  that  affec- 
tion is  worthy  to  be  called  love  which  includes  all 
of  the  foregoing,  and  Mantegazza  tells  us  that  love 
is  neither  more  nor  less  than  "the  power  which 
brings  about  the  union  of  the  ovum  with  the 
semen!" 

Here  we  have  quite  a  variety  of  explanations 
from  which  to  select.  No  wonder  therefore  that 
people  have  not  yet  come  to  an  agreement  as  to 
what  should  constitute  the  ideal  love,  which  would 
properly  fit  into  their  ideal  marriage.  No  wonder 
that  there  are  so  many  different  kinds  of  "Free- 
Lovers." 

Several  years  ago  I  read  a  curious  little  Ger- 
man book  entitled,  "Psychology  of  Love,"  which 
advocates  as  a  distinct  theory  for  agitation  an 
idea  which  seems  to  be  in  the  minds  of  a  great 
number  of  our  American  reformers  in  a  rather 


—  69  — 

vague  and  indefinite  form.  The  author,  M.  K. 
Ferdinand,  deplores  the  fact  that  human  beings 
manifest  so  much  sensual  or  sexual  love  which  is 
not  combined  with  spiritual  love.  The  only  way 
which  he  can  see  for  bettering  the  condition  of 
human  society,  is  to  educate  the  race  up  to  such  a 
standard  that  ''harmony  of  souls''  alone  will  be 
able  to  cause  sensual  affection,  so  that  no  sexual 
impulse  will  be  apparent  in  any  man  or  woman 
until  he  or  she  has  found  a  being  ''who  is  able  to 
dissolve  the  discords  of  his  soul  into  beautiful 
harmony."  Of  course  he  promptly  admits  that 
"many  a  generation  will  pass  away"  before  this 
goal  can  be  reached 

It  seems  very  strange  that  an  intelligent  man 
can  believe  that  such  a  state  of  affairs  could  ever 
be  attained  ;  still  it  might  be  hard  to  prove  that  it 
would  be  eternally  impossible.  His  theory  becomes 
simply  ludicrous,  however,  when  you  perceive  that, 
although  he  plainly  sees  the  dreary  prospects,  the 
sad  disappointments,  the  hopeless  misery,  which 
it  would  bring  to  the  present  and  following 
generations,  yet  he  deems  it  unnecessary  to  test 
the  value  of  this  ideal  love  and  ideal  marriage  for 
which  we  are  asked  to  make  such  tremendous 
sacrifices. 

Well,  as  he  is  a  Christian  lie  may  be  excused, 
but  I  can  see  no  reason  whatever  why  we  Free- 
thinkers should  torture  our  hearts  \\ith  the  un- 
grateful task  of  trying  to  force  ourselves  and  our 
progeny  to  accept  an  ideal  which  wa.-  born  in  the 
brains  of  tyrannical  and  nature-hating  priests. 


—  70  — 

As  we  have  no  other  aim  in  life  than  to  gain  the 
greatest  possible  happiness  on  earth,  we  simply 
have  to  investigate  what  desires  the  different 
kinds  of  love  will  cause  and  then  try  to  find  a  way 
in  which  all  of  these  desires  or  as  many  as  possible 
of  them  can  be  satisfied  without  lessening  the 
happiness  of  any  human  being. 

With  this  object  in  view  we  will  now  define 
love  and  its  desires: 

Every  normal  and  healthy  human  being  after 
reaching  maturity  feels  a  longing  desire  for  sexual 
intercourse.  Each  needs  as  associate  a  person  of 
the  opposite  sex,  and  at  first  (in  the  case  of  a 
man)  his  "affectionate  inclination"  is  towards 
woman  in  general;  any  sexually  sound  person  of 
that  sex  could  fully  satisfy  his  physical  desire. 
But,  in  looking  around  for  a  partner,  he  promptly 
finds  that  many  persons  are  so  unsympathetic  to 
him  that  the  pleasure  of  intercourse  with  them 
would  be  vastly  less  than  with  others  more  com- 
plementary to  his  nature.  Finally  he  perceives 
that  one  particular  person  has  such  a  charm  for 
him  that  he  decidedly  prefers  this  one  being  to  all 
others  for  the  satisfaction  of  his  natural  impulse. 
We  call  this  natural  affinity  or — sexual  love.  As  it 
means  the  preference  for  a  physical  or  sensual 
pleasure  it  is  also  called  physical  or  sensual  love. 

We  know  that  this  love  may  often  be  entirely 
independent  of  any  "soul-harmony ;"  that  it  may 
suddenly  grow  into  an  ardent  passion  without  the 
least  knowledge  of  the  mind  and  character  of  the 
chosen  one;  that  for  the  young  men  and  women  of 


to-day  it  is  that  ''inexplicable  something"  which 
draws  them  together  with  irresistible  force  in  spite 
of  unsympathetic  spiritual  qualities  and  the 
contra-argumentation  of  reason. 

''I  ask  not,  I  care  not 
If  guilt's  in  thy  heart ; 
I  know  that  I  love  thee, 
Whatever  thou  art !" 

Any  fervent  attachment  of  one  human  being 
to  another,  which  is  deemed  worthy  to  be  called 
love,  and  which  is  not  due  to  the  desire  for  sexual 
intercourse,  is  generally  termed  spiritual  love  to 
distinguish  it  from  the  former.  This  may  seem 
incorrect,  as  such  love  may  also  be  but  the  result 
of  the  appreciation  of  physical  qualities,  but  per- 
haps it  may  be  justified  by  the  following  con- 
siderations: It  is  generally  acknowledged,  and  I 
see  no  reason  to  doubt,  that  sexual  love  is  due  to 
a  great  extent  to  ''instinctive  feeling''  (that  is,  it 
is  not  caused  by  intellectual  weighing  of  qualities), 
while  all  other  love  may  be  traced  to  some  reason- 
ing of  the  mind  or  impulsion  of  the  aesthetic 
nature:  As  it  will  not  prevent  a  clear  understand- 
ing and  may  even  facilitate  it.  we  will  be  satisfied 
for  the  present  with  this  distinction.  Hence  we  find 
that  mental  or  spiritual  love  may  originate  in 
either  of  the  following  ways : 

1.  Reflections  such  as  these:  How  good,  how 
beautiful,  noble,  courageous,  refined,  vise,  or  power- 
ful he  or  she  is! — These  real  or  imagined  qualities 
may  cause  such  an  ardent  admiration  and  ap- 
preciation of  one  person  by  another  that  the  well- 


being  of  the  former  is  necessary  to  the  happiness 
of  the  latter.  The  greatest  joy  of  the  lover  consists 
in  giving  joy  to  the  beloved.  This  so-called  un- 
selfish love  may  also  be  caused  by  long  and 
intimate  co-operation  and  association  of  interests 
(as  in  the  family),  or  by  the  continuously  potent 
influence  which  one  human  being  has  on  the 
development  of  another  (as  in  the  relation  of  the 
parents  to  the  child,  of  the  guardians  to  the  ward, 
of  the  foster-parents  to  the  adopted  child),  or  by 
the  feeling  of  gratitude  (as  of  the  child  for  the 
parent). 

2.  The  human  being  feels  that  for  a  happy  life 
he  absolutely  needs  to  co-operate  and  co-enjoy 
with  others,  be  it  in  music,  song  and  dance,  in 
walks  and  talks,  in  games  and  sport,  in  reveling  in 
poesy  and  literature,  in  the  study  of  art  and 
science — or  in  sexual  intercourse.  He  discovers 
that  in  any  one  of  these  labors  or  recreations  the 
co-operation  of  some  persons  is  far  more  agree- 
able to  him  than  that  of  others  and  in  any  one  of 
them  he  may  prefer  one  individual  to  all  others.  If 
this  refers  to  pleasure  or  work  which  is  excep- 
tionally important  to  him,  or  if  he  prefers  the 
same  person  for  several  of  these  enjoyments,  a 
passionate  love  may  be  the  result. 

It  may  be  in  onl<T  to  remark  here  that  those 
"grand  moments"  in  our  lives,  when  the  highest 
exaltation  of  joy  or  the  terrible  depression  of  grief, 
when  bright  hopes  or  imminent  dangers,  or  the 
spontaneous  enthusiasm  for  a  great. cause,  stir  the 
souls  of  two  human  beings  simultaneously  with 


—  73  — 

mighty  force  and  passion,  are  very  likely  to  bring 
those  two  very  near  to  each  other  and  to  give  to 
each  of  them  a  priceless  value  in  the  eyes  of  the 
other  as  a  partner  in  future  co-operations  and  co- 
enjoyments. 

3.  In  naming  in  the  foregoing  a  few  examples 
of  objects  of  co-operation,  I  left  out  some  of  the 
most  important,  that  is  all  those  in  which  the 
object  in  view  is  not  so  much  the  direct  enjoyment 
of  the  co-operation  in  itself,  as  a  mutually  bene- 
ficial joining  of  forces  in  the  acquisition  of  the 
means  for  enjoyment  (commercial  and  industrial 
associations,  professional  unions,  joint  households 
with  mutually  advantageous  division  of  the  ne- 
cessary labor,  etc.)  It  may  appear  a  little  queer  to 
some  readers  to  designate  as  "spiritual  love"  an 
affection  which  is  simply  the  result  of  the  appre- 
ciated usefulness  of  another  person  in  co-operation 
in  the  acquisition  and  utilization  of  material 
things,  but  it  cannot  be  denied  that  such  apprecia- 
tion has  often  caused  even  passionate  attachment. 
As  we  cannot  possibly  call  it  sexual  we  shall  have 
to  let.  it  stand  under  the  title  of  ''spiritual  love." 

Our  observations  show  that  the  desires  of  love 
are  manifold  and  varied,  but  it  may  be  truthfully 
stated  that  they  all  refer  to  some  kind  of  co-enjoy- 
ment or  co-operation,  and  that  the  object  in  view 
is  not  so  much  to  find  an  "image  of  self"  as  to  gain 
the  best  possible  counterpart.  Therefore  it  follows 
that,  as  woman  is  the  best  counterpart  of  man — 
not  only  in  sexual  intercourse,  but  in  almost  all 
enjoyments  and  labors,  "spiritual"  love  is  more 


-  74  — 

frequent  between  men  and  women  than  between 
persons  of  the  same  sex. 

Wherever  spiritual  love  exists  between  a  man 
and  a  woman  who  are  both  sexually  healthy  it  is 
very  liable  to  cause  also  a  mutual  preference  for 
sexual  intercourse,  or,  in  other  words,  sexual  love. 
This  is  due  to  the  fact  that  the  pleasure  of  the  sex- 
act  does  not  consist  in  physical  lust  only,  but  also 
in  the  sympathetic  pleasure  of  giving  joy  fo 
another.  It  is  self-evident,  therefore,  that  the 
pleasure  must  be  greatly  enhanced  by  spritual 
love  for  the  participant,  as  that  adds  so  much  to 
the  intensity  of  that  essential  part  of  the  delight, 
the  happiness  of  giving  happiness  to  others. 

On  the  other  hand,  it  may  be  asserted  that 
sexual  passion  causes  all  the  qualities  of  the  be- 
loved to  appear  in  such  an  embellishing  radiance 
that  a  kind  of  spiritual  love  may  result  therefrom. 
If,  confiding  in  this,  intimate  association  of  inter- 
ests shall  follow  (as  in  the  case  of  modern  mar- 
riage) then  the  situation  will  become  decidedly 
dangerous;  full  satisfaction  will  promptly  extin- 
guish the  embellishing  light,  coolly  and  critically 
practical  reason  will  investigate,  and  the  resulting 
disappointment  will  terminate  in  the  opposite  of 
spiritual  love.  If,  however,  the  full  satisfaction  of 
the  sexual  passion  brings  no  servitude,  no  duty, 
no  responsibility  to  either,  then  the  memory  of 
that  "grand  moment,  in  which  the  highest  exalta- 
tion of  joy  made  two  hearts  beat  in  perfect 
unison,"  may  develop  a  lasting  spiritual  affection 


between  the  two  in  spite  of  a  thousand  unsym- 
pathetic qualities,  which  may  exist,  but  with  which 
the  lovers  are  not  asked  to  contend. 


VIII. 

The  Value  of  Marriage  and  the  Free  Love 
Movement. 


A  FTEJR  having  investigated  the  different  causes 
and  desires  of  love,  let  us  ask  the  following- 
questions:  In  what  do  the  beauty  and  the  happi- 
ness of  our  present  so-called  happy  marriages  con- 
sist? Why  is  it  so  valuable?  What  is  there  about 
it  that  we  wish  to  retain  and  for  which  \\e  need 
compulsion  ?  Is  it  the  beautiful  sensual  love?  Is  it 
the  beautiful  sexual  relation? 

In  spite  of  the  unfavorable  circumstances,  there 
are  yet  many  pleasant  pictures  of  beautiful  family- 
life  to  be  seen,  and  I  beg  3'ou  to  ask  yourself  the 
question,  What  it  is  that  you  admire  in  them. 
Many  a  poet  and  novelist  has  described  to  us  a 
cozy  home-circle,  where  is  found  harmonious  co- 
operation, where  husband  and  wife  faithfully  share 
each  others'  woes  and  joys,  are  united  in  love  for 
their  children,  and  join  their  efforts  in  rearing  and 
educating  them. — Suppose, however, that  our  poet 
or  author  should  wish  to  picture  for  us  a  pretty 
idyl  of  sensual  love,  a  beautiful  sexual  associa- 
tion— would  he  ever  dream  of  selecting  that  faith- 


ful  married  couple  as  his  hero  and  heroine?  No! — 
If  he  does  not  choose  "sweet  innocence,'' — if  he 
dare  not  glorify  "secret  sin," — if  the  hero  and 
heroine  must  be  the  duly  registered  father  and 
mother  of  a  child  or  of  children — then  you  may 
rest  assured  that  the  happy  denouement  will  have 
to  be  preceded  by  some  little  adultery  or  at  least 
an  adulterous  thought,  by  a  long  separation,  a 
serious  jealousy,  or — in  short — by  some  "extra- 
ordinary" incident  which  will  give  to  the  kisses 
and  embraces  a  little  of  that  necessary  flavor,  free 
choice ! 

It  is  certainly  not  sexual  love,  which  makes 
that  marriage  appear  beautiful  to  us.  Their  sexual 
pleasure  is  deprived  of  the  blissful  charm  of  woo- 
ing and  winning,  for  it  has  become  "marital 
duty !"  It  is  void  of  the  cheerful  pride  in  being  the 
chosen  one,  for  they,  have  no  more  choice!  And 
finally,  is  it  not  human  nature  to  value  that  but 
little  which  we  can  have  for  the  simple  asking,  and 
to  value  even  le.ss  what  is  forced  upon  us? 

What  is  it,  then,  that  gives  value  to  this  mar- 
riage? It  is  the  true  comradeship,  the  association 
of  interest,  the  intimate  friendship—the  "spiritual" 
love! 

In  Karl  Heinzen's  treatise  on  "The  Rights  of 
Women,  or  the  Sexual  Relations,"  you  will  find  the 
following  sentences :  "The  so-called  nuptial  bed  is 
the  grave  of  false,  but  the  ark  of  covenant  of  true 
love."  "Of  course  I  hold  that  love  in  marriage 
changes  from  a  state  of  passionate  attachment 
into  a  condition  of  quiet  friendship." 


—  78  — 

If  these  sentences  mean  anything1  they  must 
mean  this:  1.  The  nuptial  bed  is  the  grave  of 
sexual  love  (which  K.  H.  calls  "false"),  but  under 
favorable  circumstances  the  intimate  association 
of  interests  may  strengthen  and  increase  spiritual 
love. 

2.  In  marriage  passionate  love  changes  into 
quiet  friendship.  (That  is  if  the  necessary  condi- 
tions for  such  friendship  are  present.) 

Every  close  observer  will  have  to  admit  the 
•truth  of  these  statements.  If  thereupon  Karl 
Heinzen  had  advised  our  young  men  and  women 
to  be  very  careful  in  the  selection  of  the  life-com- 
panion, to  investigate  seriously  and  deliberately 
all  of  the  qualities  of  the  chosen  one  before  enter- 
ing into  marriage,  and  had  urged  them  not  to  let 
that  "blind"  passion  be  the  guide,  which  will  be 
gone  after  the  wedding-ui^Iit  or  at  least  after  the 
honey-moon,  then  we  would  have  to  call  it  good, 
practical  advice.  But  Karl  Heinzen  was  not  so 
practical ;  he  was  an  enthusiastic  admirer  of  ideal 
love,  of  passionate  love,  and  he  deeply  deplored 
that  the  sad  words  of  Schiller  are  yet  so  true: 

"With  that  sweetest  holiday 

Must  the  -May  of  life  depart; 
With  the  cestus  loosed — away 

Flies  illusion  from  the  heart." 

And  so  he  further  says :  "Lovers  must  come  to 
be  to  each  other  that  which  men  have  hitherto 
placed  above  the  clouds  by  the  words  "god"  and 
"goddess;"  yes,  they  must  become  even  more  to 
each  other,  namely,  the  realized  ideal  of  their 


—  79  — 

moral  conceptions  and  of  their  sense  of  beauty. 
If  they  learn  to  seek  and  to  appreciate  each  other 
in  this  sense,  love  will  become  a  lasting  enthu- 
siasm!" 

What  a  queer  inconsistency  the  confusion  in 
the  conception  of  the  word  love  has  caused  here  I 
Is  this  the  "quiet  friendship"  which  must  be  the 
result  of  marriage?  Did  the  author  not  know  that 
in  nine  cases  out  of  ten  this  exaltation  in  the  feel- 
ings, which  places  the  beloved  "above  the  clouds,"' 
is  the  sure  sign  of  strong  sensual  or  sexual  love,  in 
other  words,  of  that  love  which  is  killed  in  the 
nuptial  bed  ?  The  following  is  his  plan  for  better- 
ing conditions:  All  young  men  and  women  shall 
marry  very  soon  after  maturity;  all  marriages 
shall  be  strictly  monogamous,  but  there  shall  be 
absolutely  free  choice  in  entering  into  and  dis- 
solving them;  any  marriage  shall  be  promptly 
annulled  by  an  unfaithful  desire  of  either  party,  for 
he  says:  "An  adulterous  thought  is  the  sign  that 
the  love  has  changed  to  another;  marriage  with- 
out love  is  no  longer  marriage,  hence  so-called 
adultery  can  be  nothing  more  than  the  actual 
proof  thafc  marriage  no  longer  exists."  Therefore, 
when  the  first  adulterous  thought  comes  to  the 
young  couple,  they  shall  promptly  part  and  each 
of  them  enter  into  a  new  marriage.  ''Their  ex- 
perience may  serve  as  a  guide  which  will  enable 
them  to  find  their  ideal  all  the  surer  in  another 
relationship!"  And  so  they  will  change  until  they 
have  reached  that  ideal  state  in  which  husband 
and  wife  will  appear  to  each  other  as  "god': 


—  80  — 

and  "goddess!"  As  the  author  is  well  aware 
that  in  some  cases  this  may  necessitate  a  good 
many  "changes,"  the  state  must  of  course  take 
care  of  the  children. 

This  is  K.  Heinzen's  theory.  Many  other  free- 
lovers  are  not  such  enthusiastic  dreamers  and 
have  come  to  the  conclusion  that  it  will  not  do  to 
raise  the  ideal  "above  the  clouds;"  some  have 
advised  the  discarding  of  the  word  "marriage" 
altogether;  others  have  lost  faith  in  the  state  as  a 
guardian  for  their  children  but — excepting  these 
differences — whether  these  social  radicals  be  Eng- 
lish, German,  French  or  American,  the  essence  and 
substance  of  their  theory  is  the  same,  viz :  Love 
alone  can  sanctify  a  union  between  a  man  and  a 
women;  enforced  love  is  no  love  at  all,  it  means 
prostitution  or  rape!  And  what  does  the  opponent 
answer?  "If  all  men  and  women  considered  them- 
selves perfectly  free  in  love,  and  if  the  first  adulter- 
ous thought  should  then  promptly  sever  the  union 
between  a  man  and  woman,  in  a  very  short  time 
all  famity  relations  would  be  broken  up.  That  will 
not  do.  We  need  constancy,  faithfulness  and  the 
sense  of  duty,  to  protect  our  homes,  to  secure  for 
our  children  the  loving  care  of  a  father  and  a 
mother." 

It  takes  a  great  deal  of  vulgarity  not  to  agree 
with  the  arguments  of  the  free-lover — and  it  takes 
a  great  deal  of  "idealism"  to  contradict  the  state- 
ment of  his  opponent.  Therefore,  it  seems  to  many 
a  sad  dilemma  in  which  we  must  choose  between 
two  evils.  But  that  is  not  the  case.  Please  notice 


—  81  — 

this:  When  the  free-lover  condemns  marriage  he 
thinks  of  the  enforced  sexual  relation ;  when  his 
opponent  defends  the  institution  he  thinks  of  the 
association  of  interest,  of  the  comradeship,  the 
mutual  aid  and  sympathy,  the  joint  interest  in  the 
children,  and  the  like.  Both  of  them  are  so 
thoroughly  hypnotized  by  a  foolish  love-ideal  that 
they  seem  to  be  perfectly  unconscious  of  the  fact 
that  they  are  speaking  of  two  entirely  different 
things,  which  need  not  be  dependent  upon  each 
other.  Let  us  consider  them  separately,  and  we 
will  soon  reach  a  favorable  conclusion : 

1.  The  enjoyment  of  sexual  intercourse  is 
essential  to  the  normal  and  healthy  life  of  human 
beings.  Moral  and  legal  laws  deprive  many  of  this 
pleasure,  force  others  to  unnatural,  unhealthy, 
and  perverse  satisfaction,  or  to  injurious  excess — 
in  short,  cause  misery  all  around. 

Therefore,  let  us  have  perfect  liberty  in  sexual 
relations ! 

'2.  The  ethical  value  and  the  beauty  of  sexual 
love  consists  in  the  necessity  of  Avooiug  and  win- 
ning. The  only  truly  beautiful  sexual  intercourse 
is  that  which  is  brought  about  by  mutual  spon- 
taneous sexual  love.  The  fact  or  the  belief  that  it 
is  the  result  of  a  contract,  a  p re-arrangement,  that 
it  is  a  duty,  or  that  it  is  simply  the  unavoidable 
tribute  of  a  "relation,"  is  sure  to  rob  it  of  the 
greatest  part  of  its  charm  and  beauty. 

Therefore,  let  us  make  no  sexual  contracts  what- 
ever, neither  for  life  nor  for  a  week;  let  us  denounce 
such  contracts  as  immoral  and  dangerous;  let 


—  82  — 

there  be  neither  monogamy,  polygamy  nor  poly- 
andry— in  brief,  no  sexual  "living  together,"  no 
sexual  "relation"  of  any  kind  ! 

3.  We  find  that  there  is  yet  another  love  be- 
tween man  and  woman  which  is  entirely  indepen- 
dent of  sexual  preference.    The  enjoyment  of  spir- 
itual love  may  not  be  essential  to  healthy  physical 
life,  but  it  certainly  is  absolutely  necessary  for  the 
true  happiness  of  every  man  and  woman.    Should 
we  not  ask  for  the  same  absolute  liberty  in  this 
love? 

No,  for  we  have  it  already !  We  are  not  only 
free  to  love  spiritually,  but  such  loving  has  been 
preached  to  humanity  for  many  hundred  years  as 
a  sacred  duty.  If  a  person  can  furnish  the  absolute 
proof  that  his  or  her  love  is  "purely  spiritual"  and 
will  remain  "pure,"  it  may  be  bestowed  freely  upon 
any  one  or  a  dozen  persons  and  no  censure  or  per- 
secution will  follow ;  even  the  worst  Xanthippe  or 
the  most  jealously  disposed  husband  will  not 
cause  a  "scene"  on  that  account.  But  in  the  case 
of  a  man  and  a  woman  such  proof  is  almost 
always  absolutely  impossible  to  present,  and  so 
the  tyrannical  restraint  of  sexual  love  has  limited 
or  killed  all  other  kinds  of  love  as  well ;  yes,  alas! 
it  has  had  the  effect  of  making  the  effort  to  follow 
the  advice  of  the  Nazarene,  "Love  thy  neighbor  as 
thyself,"  always  a  miserable  farce! 

Give  us  freedom  in  sexual  love  and  we  will 
have  freedom  in  all  love ! 

4.  We  find  that  man  needs  for  his  greatest 
possible  happiness  the  association  and  co-opera- 


tion  of  woman  in  many  different  fields  (and  vice 
versa),  but  that  the  differences  in  circumstances 
and  above  all  the  differences  in  individual  qualities 
and  propensities  make  it  utterly  impossible  that 
any  general  rule  should  ever  apply  equitably  and 
beneficially  to  all. 

Therefore,  let  us  give  to  every  individual  per- 
fect freedom  to  choose  and  enter  into  such  associa- 
tion and  co-operation  with  woman  or  man  as  he 
or  she  deems  advisable;  let  us  denounce  as  im- 
moral and  disastrous  that  foolish  custom  which 
demands  everything  or  nothing ! 

5.  AVe  further  find,  however,  that  for  many  of 
these  associations  and  co-operations,  a  certain 
security,  mutual  confidence  in  the  stability  of  the 
union  and  mutual  trust  in  thecoustaucy  and  faith- 
fulness of  the  partner,  are  absolutely  necessary  to 
render  them  as  useful  as  they  can  and  should  be 
made. 

Therefore,  let  us  have  such  binding  agreements 
for  mutual  aid,  such  economical  or  business  con- 
tracts between  a  man  and  a  woman  as  may  ap- 
pear mutually  beneficial.  Let  us  understand  that 
we  expect  every  man  and  every  woman  to  be  faith- 
ful and  true  in  these  partnerships,  the  same  as  we 
expect  it  of  every  honorable  person  to-day  in  any 
business  agreement.  Let  us  understand  that  Free 
Love  shall  not  mean  that  the  "spontaneous  desire 
of  the  moment"  is  to  be  considered  a  sufficient 
reason  for  breaking  up  a  household,  for  forsaking 
a  family,  or  for  betraying  the  trust  of  a  friend  and 
comrade ! 


—  84  - 

Free  yourselves  from  superstition  and  then 
treat  each  one  of  the  diverse  co-operations  separ- 
ately. Plain  common  sense  will  then  tell  you  where 
a  short-time  contract  would  be  in  order,  where 
the  union  would  require  a  longer  duration  to  be 
of  any  value — and  where  any  kind  of  a  contract 
or  agreement  would  be  worse  than  useless.  Act 
accordingly  and  you  will  be  able  to  gain  and 
secure  real  Freedom  in  Love,  while  the  theory 
which  has  heretofore  been  presented  to  the  public 
as  Free  Love  means  neither  more  nor  less  than 
Free  Marriage. 


IX. 
The  Happy  Marriage  of  To=day. 


T  WILL  now  keep  my  promise  and  prove  by  an 
example  that  the  present  system  must  destroy 
a  great  part  of  the  happiness  of  the  married 
couple  even  under  the  most  favorable  circum- 
stances which  can  be  imagined. 

A  young  and  healthy  woman,  pure  and  moral 
according  to  the  present  standard,  finds  her  "true 
mate."  The  "inexplicable  something"  draws  them 
together  with  irresistible  power  and — as  luck  would 
have  it — it  is  combined  with  such  qualities  of  body 
and  mind  (and  purse  I  probably  ought  to  add)  on 
both  sides  that  the  necessary  association  of  inter- 
ests in  marriage  appear  highly  agreeable  to  both. 
The  young  man  goes  a-wooing ;  after  some  hesita- 
tion he  calls  up  his  courage,  pops  the  question, 
and  is  made  the  happiest  of  mortals  by  that  little 
word  which  means  so  much  in  such  a  case.  This  is 
a  time  of  true  happiness ;  yes,  almost  every  poetic 
mind  will  promptly  admit  that  it  is  the  most 
beautiful  period  of  life.  (What  a  strong  argument 
for  free  love  this  is  !> 


—  86  — 

As  our  3Toung  people  are  strictly  moral  their 
future  sexual  relations  are  of  course  not  alluded 
to  in  their  talks.  All  their  plans  for  the  future  refer 
to  their  intellectual  aspirations  and  comradeship, 
their  practical  co-operation,  the  home,  the  house- 
hold, the  wedding-trip  and  the  like.  Hence  it  is  but 
natural  that  only  these  matters  are  considered  in 
fixing  the  date  for  the  marriage.  I  believe  in  most 
cases  parents,  aunties,  brothers,  and  sisters  have 
even  more  to  say  in  this  matter  than  the  lovers 
themselves. 

A  day  or  two  before  the  wedding  most  mothers 
begin  to  get  nervous  and  to  become  conscious  of 
the  feeling  that  they  ought  to  give  a  few  explana- 
tions to  "sweet  innocence."  It  seems  to  them  an 
awful  task  to  speak  to  their  daughters  of  ''such 
things,"  but  it  appears  absolutely  necessan"  to 
soften  somewhat  the  abrupt  transition  from  vague 
illusions  to  "vulgar  reality,"  and  so  this  mother 
finally  plucks  up  courage  to  tell  her  darling  what 
the-  beloved  man  will  expect  from  her.  Noticing 
trouble,  fright,  and  consternation  in  the  counte- 
nance of  the  young  woman,  she  may  add  reassur- 
ingly that  "it  will  not  seem  so  bad  after  a  little 
while." 

Where  is  there  a  woman  in  the  present  "moral" 
society — be  she  ever  so  rational  otherwise — who 
can  speak  to  her  daughter  on  such  an  occasion  a 
few  appreciative  and  cheerful  words  on  the  beauty 
and  charm  of  sensual  love  and  sexual  intercourse? 
You  will  hardly  find  a  single  one — and  yet  such  an 


utterance  would  be  of  great  importance,  it  would 
prevent  many  a  tragedy. 

Many  a  beautiful  love  has  been  killed  on  the 
wedding  night  .simply  because  the  young  husband 
was  too  excited  or  otherwise  unable  to  give  an 
eloquent  explanation  of  the  strange  fact  that 
actions  which  heretofore  appeared  to  the  young- 
woman  as  the  meanest  and  nastiest  had  suddenly 
become  innocent,  good  and  noble,  yes,  even  a 
••sacred  duty" — and  therefore  scared  the  young 
bride  with  his  ardent  and  impetuous  advances, 
which  fill  her  with  loathing  and  disgust. 

But,  excuse  me,  we  wanted  to  consider  only  the 
most  favorable  circumstances.  We  will  suppose 
therefore  that  our  young  hero  has  given  this 
explanation  in  due  time  and  in  most  felicitous 
phrases.  (I  can  assure  you  that  it  is  not  a  very 
easy  task!)  Now,  if  we  can  add  that  our  young- 
couple  happen  to  be  well  matched  in  regard  to 
sexual  needs  and  inclinations  and  that  they  have 
made  no  mistake  in  their  judgment  of  their  indi- 
vidual qualities,  then  we  have  the  ideal  married 
couple  of  to-day. 

Our  nonsensical  marriage  customs  generally 
have  the  effect  that  the  first  "tribute  of  love"  is 
demanded  from  the  young  woman  at  the  most  un- 
favorable moment,  but,  nevertheless,  if  she  is 
sexually  healthy  the  normal  satisfaction  of  the 
strong  natural  impulse  may  have  a  beneficent 
influence,  and  increased  physical  and  mental  health 
may  be  the  immediate  result.  The  young  husband, 
being  able  to  have  regular  sexual  intercourse 


—  88  — 

sanctioned  by  society,  will  also  perceive  an  im- 
mense relief -in  the  consequent  freedom  from  the 
trouble  and  anxiety  which  his  secret  craving  has 
heretofore  caused  him. 

How  will  this  regular  sexual  intimacy  affect 
their  happiness?  Well,  under  such  favorable  circum- 
stances it  certainly  may  for  some  time  appear  to 
them  the  highest  bliss.  What  a  transforming  light 
the  pleasant  memory  of  those  beautiful  nights  will 
throw  upon  the  prosaic  doings  of  the  day!  How 
cheerfully  they  will  attend  to  their  respective 
routine  duties,  knowing  that  a  delicious  enjoyment 
will  follow !  How  beautifully  everything  is  arranged 
for  these  enjoyments!  How  easily  these  intimate 
unions  are  attained  now,  which  formerly  were 
utterly  impossible!  But  one  bed  for  both! — with 
enthusiastic  anticipation  every  ardent  youth  will 
think  of  that ! — and  yet,  what  a  depraving  compul- 
sion where  it  becomes  the  custom  I 

But  to  our  young  couple  it  yet  appears  the 
best  possible  arrangement.  What  a  charming  and 
delicious  task  it  seems  to  the  man  to  conquer  the 
reluctance  and  timidity  of  his  young  wife,  who 
gradually  allows  him  more  and  more  "liberties!'' 
The  "sense  of  shame,"  and  the  "moral  feeling," 
the  result  of  a  narrow  and  severe  moral  education, 
will  not  yield  at  once;  even  the  most  ardent  and 
eloquent  words  of  love  can  not  subdue  these  feel- 
ings in  the  first  hour;  for  quite  a  while  it  may  be 
necessary  to  woo  and  fight  for  many  little  priv- 
ileges! Ah,  beautiful  honey-moon,  for  thee  we  nil 
prefer  "sweet  innocence?'to  the  "knowing  woman  !" 


—  89  — 

Many  grand  words  have  been  said  and  written 
in  praise  of  the  charm  and  beauty  of  ''innocence" 
in  young  women.  Yet  all  these  poetical  glorifica- 
tions cannot  change  the  fact  that  this  "innocence" 
means  neither  more  nor  less  than  stupidity,  a  lack 
of  knowledge  of  self  combined  with  shame  of  self. 
To  those  who  still  regard  the  sexual  impulse  as  the 
devil  himself,  all  this  may  appear  perfectly  consist- 
ent with  their  theory,  but  there  are  many  intelligent 
men  who  long  ago  discarded  this  absurd  contempt 
for  sexuality,  who  still  assert  that  this  "innocence" 
adds  a  peculiar  charm  to  the  woman  of  sixteen  to 
twenty,  and  to  whom  the  idea  of  "sweet  sixteen" 
knowing  all  about  sexual  matters  would  be  almost 
revolting.  How  queer  that  these  men.  who  prize  ed- 
ucation and  intelligence  in  all  other  fields,  for  wo- 
men as  well  as  for  men,  should  have  such  a  weak- 
ness for  stupidity  in  women  in  this  one  respect! 
But  there  is  a  valid  and  sufficient  reason  for  this 
also.  This  so-called  innocence  lengthens  and  em- 
bellishes the  honey-moon !  As  I  have  stated  before, 
the  value  of  sexual  intercourse  for  intelligent 
human  beings  consists  not  merely  in  the- physical 
pleasure;  probably  the  greater  part  of  its  charm 
and  beauty  is  found  in  the  hopeful  wooing  and  the 
pride  in  winning,  and  this  of  course  is  possible 
only  where  there  is  the  right  of  resistance.  But  the 
present  moral  code  and  a  foolish  love-ideal  have 
so  perverted  reason  that  the  "moral  man"  of  to- 
day positively  denies  this  right  of  resistance  to 
every  "knowing"  woman  after  she  has  chosen  once, 
for  he  will  either  despise  her  as  a  courtesan,  or,  if 


—  90  — 

she  has  once  declared  her  love  for  a  certain  man, 
expects  permanent  submission  to  that  man.  Only 
to  the':pure"and  ignorant  young  woman  he  must 
accord  a  certain  right  of  reluctance  and  resistance 
even  after  he  possesses  her  through  love  or  legal 
bondage,  which  means,  in  other  words,  that  a  little 
wooing  is  still  necessary  even  after  she  has  become 
"his  own.*'  In  a  free  society,  where  no  moral  nor 
legal  law,  no  former  declaration  of  love,  would 
entitle  a  man  to  expect  submission  as  a  matter  of 
course,  where  he  would  have  to  woo  and  win  as 
often  as  he  wished  to  enjoy,  ignorance  (now  falsely 
termed  innocence)  would  have  no  charm,  not  even 
in  sweet  sixteen. 

Many  a  smart  young  wife  instinctively  feels 
the  force  of  this  conception  and  will  try  to  play 
the  part  of  the  "innocent"  woman  a  little  longer; 
she  will  show  a  sense  of  shame,  a  shy  and  timid 
reluctance,  even  after  she  has  overcome  these  feel- 
ings inwardly,  in  order  to  enjoy  again  and  again 
the  charming  pleasure  of  yielding  to  ardent  woo- 
ing. Very  soon,  however,  the  young  husband  will 
have  but  an  ironical  smile  for  such  coquetry.  Xo, 
this  innocence  cannot  be  retained  very  long  in  the 
close  and  intimate  "living  together''  of  present 
marriage;  soon  the  least  sexual  excitement  will 
cause  indulgence  without  any  particular  prelude; 
no  further  wooing  is  necessary,  for  it  has  become 
"marital  duty"  or,  what  is  about  as  bad,  the  mat- 
ter-of-course tribute  of  love ! 

As  the  cozy  nuptial-chamber  of  our  young 
couple  is  the  one  place  in  which  they  feel  secure 


—  91  — 

from  intrusion,  it  soon  appears  as  the  fittest  place 
for  talking-  seriously  about  all  their  associated 
interests,  and  also  of  course  for  settling  their  little 
differences  and  disputes.  Hence  it  will  often  hap- 
pen that,  while  preparing  for  the  night's  rest,  they 
will  converse  upon  the  most  prosaic  subjects. 
(A  few  months  ago  our  young  hero  would  have 
thought  it  impossible  that  he  could  ever  look  on 
so  coldly  and  indifferently  while  his  pretty  bride 
was  undressing,  but — "there's  nothing  like  getting 
used  to  a  thing!")  After  they  are  comfortably 
settled  in  bed,  not  being  over-tired,  they  will  re- 
sume their  talk  about  the  political  prospects,  the 
chances  for  promotion,  the  dullness  of  business, 
the  trouble  with  the  hired  girl,  the  havoc  which 
cats  and  mice  have  caused  in  the  pantry  and  ward- 
robe, and  so  on— until— well,  until  one  of  them 
notices  an  agreeable  titillation  on  account  of  the 
close  proximity  of  the  nude  bodies — and — fifteen 
minutes  later  they  have  done  their  duty  and  are 
sound  asleep ! 

This  is  sexual  love  in  marriage — not  in  the  un- 
happy marriage — not  in  your  troublesome  unions, 
where  there  is  a  serious  fight  every  little  while  (in 
these  the  reconciliations  may  often  add  no  small 
extra  charm  to  the  connubial  embrace) — but  in 
your  quiet  and  harmless  marriage  with  its  model 
of  constancy  nnd  faithfulness,  of  true  comradeship, 
in  short,  in  the  ideal  marriage  of  to-day.  Xo  won- 
der, therefore,  that  a  vague  feeling  of  unrest  and 
dissatisfaction  will  soon  come  over  the  young  wife, 
that,  in  spite  of  the  good  circumstances,  the  pretty 


—  92  - 

home  and  the  model  husband,  life  will  often  appear 
very  dull  and  prosaic  to  her.  In  vain  she  will  ask 
herself  the  question  why  it  is  that  their  relations 
appear  so  cool  and  indifferent  now  compared  with 
the  honey-moon,  why  all  those  playful  fondlings 
have  ceased,  why  the  kisses  and  caresses  ha.ve  lost 
so  much  of  their  charm.  She  feels  that  it  is  not  due 
to  real  indifference,  that  each  of  them  takes  as 
fervent  an  interest  in  the  weal  and  woe  of  the 
other  as  ever  before,  but  she  finds  no  answer  except 
that  they  have  grown  older  and  wiser,  and  with  a 
sad  smile  of  resignation  she  will  look  back  upon 
the  foolish,  but  ah,  so  beautiful  "illusions  of 
youth!" 

Observe  our  young  couple  after  a  few  years 
have  passed.  What  has  become  of  their  love-rela- 
tion? The  love  has  changed  "from  a  state  of 
passionate  attachment  to  a  condition  of  quiet 
friendship." 

I  certainly  do  not  wish  to  speak  lightly  of  this 
quiet  friendship.  The  true  comradeship  which 
grows  more  firm  and  loyal  with  each  year  of 
intimate  living  together,  which,  in  fact,  becomes 
indissoluble  through  that  most  beautiful  and  most 
binding  association  of  interests,  the  joint  rearing 
and  educating  of  children,  is  indeed  of  great  value, 
but  in  spite  of  this  friendship,  in  spite  of  the  most 
favorable  material  circumstances,  life  may  become 
very  dull  and  dreary,  and  husband  and  wife  may 
grow  very  prosaic,  indolent,  and  indifferent  be- 
cause a  foolish  compulsion  has  deprived  them  of 
that  sweetest  charm  of  love,  which  consists  in  the 


—  93  — 

constant  seeking  and  finding,  soliciting  and  yield- 
ing, wooing  and  winning  for  the  enjoyments  of 
love. 

The  quiet  friendship  which  exists  between  the 
husband  and  wife  gives  to  both  a  safe  and  sound 
foundation  for  a  happy  life,  but  they  have  spoilt 
it  all  by  adding  to  their  economic  contract  and 
their  comradeship  contract  (promise  of  mutual  aid 
and  assistance)  a  love  contract  and  a  sexual  con- 
tract. This  must  degrade  their  sexual  intercourse 
and  rob  it  of  all  its  beauty  and  dignity.  As  women 
are  generally  far  more  punctilious  than  men  in 
keeping  this  contract,  the  harmful  influence  of  such 
pernicious  agreements  is  even  more  apparent  in 
them  than  in  men.  As  sexual  intercourse  with  the 
husband  has  become  a  custom  and  a  "duty,"  it 
must  be  expected  as  a  natural  result  that  almost 
any  other  somewhat  sympathetic  man  will  have 
more  attraction  for  our  young  wife  (sexually)  than 
her  husband,  but  here  your  moral  law  promptly 
steps  in  and  positively  forbids  any  sexual  thought 
of  another  man:  yes,  this  law  goes  even  far- 
ther: As  it  is  impossible  to  draw  a  definite 
boundary-line  between  the  sensual  and  the  spir- 
itual, it  virtually  prohibits  any  free  social  inter- 
course with  other  men.  Every  male  guest  whom  the 
husband  brings  into  the  house,  every  gentleman 
who  must  be  courteous  to  her  in  society,  respects 
in  this  virtuous  young  wife  the  sacred  property  of 
another  man,  and  rigidly  guards  himself  against 
any  warmer  feeling  towards  her;  his  conversation 
with  her  hardly  ever  goes  beyond  a  few  meaning- 


—  94  — 

less  polite  phrases,  for  any  serious  and  animated 
discourse  would  be  too  conspicuous,  and  probably 
dangerous;  for  the  latter  he  prefers  the  society  of 
men,  or  of  "women  of  loose  morals."  The  free 
social  intercourse  of  our  young  wife  with  the  out- 
side world,  therefore,  is  restricted  to  the  society  of 
those  of  her  sex,  who,  being  equally  virtuous,  are 
equally  enslaved.  No  wonder,  then,  if  she  becomes 
dull  and  narrow-minded  and  is  greedy  for  scandal- 
ous "town-talk"  and  gossip  or  any  other  similar 
sensation,  which  may  bring  a  little  welcome  excite- 
ment into  the  monotony  ot  her  life. 

The  study  of  the  so-called  happy  marriages  of 
to-day  must  convince  us  that:  1.  The  intimate 
association  of  interests  has  the  tendency  to  create 
a  true  comradeship  and  friendship,  and  wherever 
the  latter  has  existed  beforehand  to  intensify  and 
strengthen  the  same.  2.  That,  even  under  the 
most  favorable  circumstances  which  can  be  imag- 
ined, the  sad  words  of  the  poet  heretofore  quoted 
will  forever  be  true  of  marriage :  "With  the  cestus 
loosed — away  flies  illusion  from  the  heart!"  This 
will  remain  true  so  long  as  men  and  women  are 
foolish  enough  to  try  to  retain  love  by  a  love  con- 
tract or  to  secure  sexual  happiness  by  a  sexual 
contract. 

On  the  other  hand  the  study  of  unhappy  mar- 
riages will  show  us  that  in  most  cases  the  unhappi- 
ness  is  caused  directly  either  by  the  enforcement  or 
by  the  breach  of  the  sexual  or  love  contract.  Where 
this  is  not  the  reason  we  will  find  that  the  misery 
is  due  to  the  fact  that  a  man  and  a  woman  entered 


into  associations  (to  which  they  were  not  adapted 
and  for  which  they  had  no  inclination)  simply  be- 
cause, enslaved  by  custom  or  a  foolish  love-ideal, 
they  considered  them  inseparable  from  the  desired 
union. 

From  these  observations  a  logical  thinker  who 
is  free  from  superstition  can  draw  no  other  conclu- 
sion than  that  men  and  women  should  consider 
each  association  separately  and  enter  into  such 
only  as  appear  mutually  useful  and,  above  all,  that 
they  should  under  no  circumstances  degrade  their 
love  relation  by  a  love  contract  nor  debase  their 
sexual  intercourse  bv  a  sexual  contract. 


X. 

How  long  will  Love  Relations  last  in  a 
Free  Society? 


TV/I  ANY  a  reader  will  probably  ask  this  question 
with  some  anxiety.  As  love  is  a  feeling,  not 
an  action,  I  promptly  answer:  For  life,  wherever 
fervent  love  receives  the  adequate  response.  In  a 
free  society  all  those  factors  disappear  which  now 
kill  love,  and  furthermore  nobody  would  there  con- 
sider it  necessary  to  suppress  love  for  one  being  in 
order  to  be  able  to  love  another.  The  result  would 
be  that  wherever  love  was  fully  reciprocated  and 
hence  led  to  a  beautiful  co-enjoyment,  the  man 
and  woman  would  never  afterwards  be  indifferent 
to  each  other,  although  there  might  be  remark- 
able changes  in  the  degree  of  fervor  and  intimacy 
of  their  attachment. 

But  I  suppose  in  most  cases  the  above  question 
would  not  refer  to  the  constancy  in  the  feeling  but 
to  the  duration  of  the  co-operations  resulting  from 
love.  This  requires  a  more  lengthy  answer,  and  for 
that  purpose  I  must  mention  a  few  examples  of 
such  co-operation : 


—  97  - 

1.  Music,  song  and  dance,  games  and  sports, 
walks  and  talks,  and  other  recreations  : 

2.  Mental  co-operation  in  art,  science,  and  lit- 
erature : 

3.  Practical  business  co-operation  ; 

4.  The  above  combined   with  mutual  utiliza- 
tion of  the  income,  as  in  the  joint  household  ; 

5.  General  association   of   interests  resulting 
from  intimate  friendship;  comradeship  contract; 

6.  The  family. 

Notice  the  great  difference  in  these  associa- 
tions in  regard  to  the  necessary  and  presumable 
duration,  and  the  facility  of  dissolution.  For  the 
actions  mentioned  under  One  there  is  no  danger  in 
following-  the  spontaneous  desire  of  the  moment; 
the  object  desired  is  achieved  very  quickly,  and 
common  sense  teaches  us  to  leave  the  repetition 
to  the  new  desire;  the  value  and  beauty  of  the 
association  could  never  be  increased,  and  would 
always  be  diminished,  by  a  binding  contract.  A. 
mutually  beneficient  mental  co-operation  in  seri- 
ous studies  may  require  more  constancy  and  sta- 
bility and  the  importance  of  a  longer  duration  of 
the  union  and  the  difficulty  of  dissolution  increase 
with  every  number  on  my  list:  yes,  it  may  truth- 
fully be  said  that  the  last-named,  the  family-rela- 
tion, that  is,  the  joint  interest  in  the  rearing  and 
educatingof  children,  is  in  fact  almost  indissoluble. 
In  a  free  society  every  man  and  woman  will  duly 
consider  these  points  in  entering  into  any  associa- 
tion. How  will  they  consider  that  one  important 
co-operation  of  man  and  woman,  sexual  inter- 


—  98  — 

course?  It  certainly  does  not  require  a  long  time, 
and  the  dissolution  or  separation  after  each  co- 
operation of  this  kind  is  an  absolute  necessity! 
Can  there  be  any  question  about  it,  that  common 
sense  should  teach  us  to  leave  the  repetition  to 
the  new  desire?  Can  there  be  any  further  doubt  in 
our  minds  that  a  binding  contract  for  sexual  ser- 
vice would  decrease  the  value  and  beauty  of  future 
associations?  I  think  not,  and  I  hope  that  I  have 
shown  sufficient  reasons  by  this  time  why  a  free 
man  would  never  agree  to  such  a  contract,  al- 
though he  might  willingly  bind  his  freedom  by 
some  other  contracts  which  are  included  in  the 
present  marriage-relation.  A  joint  household  for  a 
day,  a  comradeship  or  friendship  for  a  week,  would 
have  but  little  value,  and  a  family-relation  lasting 
a  month  only  would  be  a  mere  farce — yet  but  a 
few  hours  will  suffice  to  make  a  beautiful  sexual 
co-operation,  a  complete,  perfectly  satisfying  en- 
tirety. 

If  a  free  man  and  a  free  worn  an  resolve  to  estab- 
lish a  common  home,  a  joint  household,  they  will 
understand  that  this  is  no  lovecontract  (although 
love  may  have  created  the  desire),  but  an  economic 
co-operation  requiring  an  economic  contract.  They 
will  know  that,  in  order  to  make  such  an  associa- 
tion valuable,  a  certain  security,  that  is,  confidence 
in  the  faithfulness  of  the  partner,  is  necessary:  that, 
therefore,  the  "spontaneous  desire  of  the  moment" 
of  either  partner  should  not  be  considered  suf- 
ficient reason  for  terminating  the  contract.  Yet 
this  is  one  of  those  associations  which,  like  other 


—  99  — 

business  agreements,  may  be  made  for  a  month,  a 
year,  or  for  indefinite  time,  and  which  generally 
can  be  easily  dissolved  and  settled  after  due  notice 
has  been  given  by  either  party. 

If  intimate  friendship  exists  between afree  man 
and  a  free  woman  they  may  consider  it  mutually 
advantageous  to  promise  each  other  aid  and  as- 
sistance in  sickness,  poverty  and  other  distress 
(which  I  call  a  comradeship  contract).  This  will  of 
course  be  meant  for  life  and  will  be  considered 
absolutely  binding  by  every  honorable  man  or 
woman ;  yet  great  changes  in  circumstance  may 
sometimes  necessitate  a  release  from  these  obliga- 
tions, but  it  will  be  understood  that  no  person  in 
the  world  can  give  this  release  except  the  partner. 
Not  even  the  most  passionate  attachment  to  an- 
other person  would  be  considered  justification  for 
a  breach  of  such  a  contract. 

If  a  free  man  and  a  free  woman  resolve  to 
establish  a  family,  that  is,  if  they  wish  to  accept 
the  relation  of  father  and  mother  to  a  child  or 
several  children,  they  will  understand  that  this  is 
an  economic  contract  requiring  an  economic  agree- 
ment, and  that  it  means  besides  an  association  of 
mental  and  emotional  interests,  which  neither  legal 
or  moral  laws  nor  the  decree  of  either  or  both 
partners  can  ever  dissolve:  which,  in  fact,  only 
death  can  annul. 

Vhere  there  is  intimate  friendship,  perfect  con- 
fidence in  each  other,  and  a  high  degree  of  mutual 
esteem,  a  free  man  and  a  free  woman  may  have  the 
desire  to  enter  into  all  of  the  above-named  asso- 


—  100  — 

ciationswith  each  other  and  to  add  to  it  a  general 
association  of  material  interests  (joint  purse — com- 
munism). This  will  be  for  life  of  course  and  after  a 
year  or  two  of  such  a  union  the  two  will  be  bound 
together  by  so  many  ties  that  a  separation  would 
result  in  severe  losses  and  a  great  forfeiture  of 
happiness  and  contentment.  We  could  hardly  ima- 
gine a  reason,  however,  why  "free"  persons  should 
desire  such  a  separation.  These  unions,  with  very 
rare  exceptions,  will  last  for  life,  and  they  will  be 
free  from  any  thought  of  a  complete  release  from 
mutual  obligations. 

In  such  associations  as  those  mentioned  in  the 
foregoing  list  free  men  and  women  may  gladly  an  J 
willingly  bind  their  liberty  in  order  to  gain  the 
greatest  possible  security  for  a  happy  and  con- 
tented life,  but  they  will  never  let  any  of  these 
agreements  interfere  with  their  freedom  of  feeling 
nor  with  their  freedom  of  action  so  far  as  the  di- 
rect desires  of  love  and  its  immediate  enjoyments 
are  concerned.  They  will  walk  and  talk,  kiss  and 
caress,  sing  and  dance,  roam  and  play  with  whom- 
soever they  please  (presuming  of  course  the  willing- 
ness of  the  respective  persons  selected  as  partners 
for  these  pleasures),  and  they  will  never  let  any 
contract,  agreement  or  "relation"  interfere  with 
their  free  and  intimate  social  intercourse  with  their 
fellow-beings.  They  may  deem  it  advisable  to  sup- 
press the  feeling  of  hate,  but  they  will  never  see 
any  reason  to  guard  against  any  feeling  of  love. 
They  will  try  to  find  something  to  love  in  every 
person  with  whom  they  associate  and  wherever  a 


-  101  — 

warm  attachment  is  felt  it  will  be  freely  shown, 
appreciated,  and  enjoyed.  Love  may  create  the  de- 
sire for  such  associations  as  those  described  in  the 
foregoing,  but  it  would  be  considered  a  meanness 
and  a  folly  to  make  the  agreement  to  such  a  con- 
tract the  condition  for  allowing  the  direct  enjoy- 
ment of  love.  Wherever  the  intimate  social  inter- 
course engenders  in  two  human  beings  a,  strong 
sexual  attraction  for  each  other,  resulting  in  the 
longing  for  the  most  intimate  physical  union,  they 
will  freely  follow  "the  spontaneous  desire  of  the 
moment"  and  enjoy  together  Avithout  any  condi- 
tions, oaths,  or  promises,  without  dreading  to  in- 
terfere thereby  with  any  rights  or  privileges  and — 
what  is  still  more  important — without  fearing  to 
interfere  with  or  destroy  thereby  any  other  love 
relation. 

"Ah,  this  means  promiscuous  sex-relations!" 
some  of  my  readers  probably  may  exclaim  at  this 
point. 

No,  I  did  not  say  that!  It  simply  means  that 
the  sex-life  of  each  individual  will  be  liberated  from 
the  control  of  society  as  well  as  from  the  control 
of  any  partner  or  mate.  We  might,  of  course,  sup- 
pose the  possibility  that  the  same  man  would 
always  choose  the  same  woman  for  this  pleasure 
and  vice  versa,  so  that,  in  spite  of  their  constant 
freedom  of  choice,  an  exclusive  sexual  intercourse 
for  life  would  be  the  result — but  we  must  not  for- 
get, that  such  an  exclusiveuess  would  be  possible 
only  with  a  couple  of  exceptional  harmony  of 
body,  mind  and  emotions,  and  even  then  would 


—  102  — 

require  such  a  remarkable  uniformity  in  their  de- 
velopment and  the  subsequent  physical  and  men- 
tal health,  that  the  case  would  be  worthy  to  be 
added  to  the  seven  wonders  of  the  world.  No,  such 
exclusiveness  is  possible  only  through  moral  or 
legal  laws  or  through  the  self-control  and  will 
power  of  the  individual,  who  constantly  guards 
himself  against  other  love  for  the  sake  of  a  love 
contract  or  a  valued  "relation."  We  denounce  the 
former  as  a  depraving  tyranny,  and  regard  the 
latter  as  a  disaster-breeding  folly  caused  by  su- 
perstition. Let  us  understand,  therefore,  that  the 
legitimate  result  of  perfect  freedom  in  love  will  be 
variety  in  the  sex-life  of  aim ost  every  human  beina  ! 
Later  on  I  will  have  occasion  to  prove  that  \ve 
have  no  reason  whatever  to  deplore  this,  that  it 
is,  in  fact,  far  more  cheering  than  if  we  had  to  sup- 
pose that  for  each  of  us  there  were  in  this  world 
but  one  true  sexual  mate,  but  one  being  who  could 
be  considered  a  beautiful  complement  to  our  sex- 
nature.  * 

*          * 

A  Varietist  Free  Lover,  to  whom  the  manu- 
script had  been  sent  for  criticism,  protested  quite 
energetically  against  the  assertions  in  this  chapter 
that  certain  associations  of  a  man  and  a  woman 
would  of  course  be  meant  for  life.  He  wrote  as  fol- 
lows: "There  is  no  "of  course''  about  it!  There 
is  no  contract  that  is  not  honorably  dissolvable 
upon  a  settlement  of  accounts.  And  what  is  to 
hinder  the  making  of  such  contracts  for  a  limited 
term  of  years?  AVliy  should  such  contracts  be 


—  103  — 

made  for  life  only  while  all  other  contracts  can  be 
made  for  any  number  of  years  ?" 

My  answer  is  this:  The  business  part  of  any 
contract  (referring  to  the  co-operation  in  the  ac- 
quisition and  the  utilization  of  material  goods) 
can  generally  be  dissolved  in  a  mutually  satis- 
factory manner  by  a  "settlement  of  accounts.'' 
This  holds  good  even  for  the  associations  for  life 
mentioned  in  the  foregoing,  but  it  must  always  be 
remembered  that  the  latter  are  far  more  than 
mere  business  contracts.  There  are  sympathies 
and  emotions  existing  between  human  beings 
which  are  greatly  strengthened  and  reinforced  by 
intimate  economic  co-operation,  and  which  are 
likely  to  cause  strong  connecting  links  between 
the  respective  parties  which  you  cannot  "demon- 
strate away"  by  any  theorizing,  which  will  exist 
even  in  perfect  freedom  from  legal  and  moral  com- 
pulsion and  which  cannot  be  severed  without  caus- 
ing severe  wounds.  Many  "failures"  of  the  Free 
Lovers  are  due  directly  to  their  strong  inclination 
to  ignore  this  fact.  As  long  as  the  love-association 
of  a  man  and  a  woman  is  voluntarily  or  instinct- 
ively treated  as  an  inseparable  unity,  this  in- 
clination is  easily  explained:  The  respective  psy- 
chological tendency  has  had  the  effect  that  in  the 
case  of  many  a  loving  couple  their  Free  Love 
theory  was  soon  reduced  to  idle  words  without 
practical  value. 

The  antagonism  towards  Christian  marriage 
has  caused  in  many  Free  Lovers,  and  especially  in 
Varietists,  a  strong  prejudice  against  anything 


—  104  — 

and  everything  included  in  this  complex  affair  and 
the  term  "for  life"'  seems  to  be  terribly  obnoxious 
to  them,  no  matter  to  what  it  may  refer.  Not  so 
with  me.  As  I  have  plainly  shown  in  a  previous 
chapter,  I  can  see  a  great  deal  of  value  and  beauty 
in  the  life-companionship  and  the  indissoluble  fam- 
ily-relation as  it  is  generally  included  in  Christian 
marriage,  but  this  pertains  only  to  certain  condi- 
tions and  a  particular  class  of  individuals.  I  do 
not  argue  the  practicability  and  expedience  of 
these  relations ;  —  that  may  safely  be  left  to  the 
common  sense  of  any  free  individual.  I  desire,  how- 
ever, to  impress  upon  your  mind  the  immense  im- 
portance of  considering  and  treating  each  rela- 
tion separately  and  of  taking  notice  of  the  great 
difference  in  the  varied  co-operations  as  to  their 
binding  qualities.  I  wish  to  remind  you  of  the  fact 
that  there  are  some  associations  which,  even  in 
spite  of  your  will  and  desire,  may  cause  almost 
inseparable  ties.  You  ask  me:  What  is  to  hinder 
persons  from  making  even  these  contracts  for  a 
year  or  two?  Nothing  whatever  except  the  natural 
feelings  and  emotions  of  human  beings,  but  these- 
will  be  sufficient  to  prevent  free  individuals  from 
ever  entering  into  such  association  of  interests  ex- 
cept where  they  are  firmly  resolved  and  where  they 
confidently  expect  that  it  shall  and  will  be  a  last- 
ing union.  I  yet  hope  to  convince  you  that,  after 
they  are  freed  from  the  detestable  sexual  contract 
and  the  farcical  promise  of  exclusive  love,  there 
will  be  no  reason  to  dread  these  relations,  al- 
though they  are  meant  and  hold  good  for  life! 


XL 
Jealousy  and  Possession. 


~\  /"AEIETY  in  the  sex-life  of  almost  every  healthy 
human  being  —  how  terribly  that  will  shock 
the  average  unprepared  philistine!  And  yet,  if  he 
is  a  Freethinker  and  can  reason  logically,  he  will 
have  to  admit  that  this  would  be  onjy  natural, 
that  it  would  be  the  necessary  result  of  real  free- 
dom in  love,  and  that  such  freedom  would  deliver 
humanity  from  an  immense  amount  of  inharmony 
and  suffering.  Forced  to  such  admissions,  he  will 
generally  exclaim,  "1  cannot  reason  with  you,  but 
I  feel,  that  you  are  wrong"  and  his  last  argument 
will  be  something  like  this :  "You  could  never  have 
felt  ardent  love  for  a  woman  or  you  would  not 
consider  such  a  state  of  affairs  possible.  Unfortun- 
ately, jealousy  is  also  a  natural  feeling  and  there 
is  no  true  love  without  jealousy.  If  a  man  is  pas- 
sionately in  love  with  a  woman  it  will  make  him 
nervous  if  she  gives  but  one  friendly  look  to  an- 
other man  —  if  she  kisses  another  it  will  almost 
drive  him  mad  —  and  the  thought  of  her  sexual  in- 
tercourse with  another  is  simply  horrible,  unbear- 
able. Who  would  ever  want  to  share  his  beloved 
with  another  man?" 


—  106  — 

The  last  question  is  very  easily  answered — 
Where  you  cannot  possess  a  Avoman,  you  will  get 
no  chance  to  share  her  with  any  one ! 

So  far  as  jealousy  is  concerned,  it  becomes  ne- 
cessary to  investigate  in  order  to  ascertain  how 
much  of  this  will  inevitably  disappear  in  freedom, 
and  how  much  will  be  left  as  an  ineradicable,  nat- 
ural feeling.  Let  us  consider,  therefore,  the  different 
motives  which  cause  jealousy  to-day  : 

I'.  One  of  the  main  causes  is  a  silly  and  bar- 
barous "code  of  honor"  which  brings  shame,  dis- 
grace, and  ridicule — not  to  the  deceiver — but  to 
the  innocent  person  who  is  duped  arid  deceived. 
That  almost  all  so-called  civilized  human  beings 
should  still  be  inclined  to  such  a  mean  and  non- 
sensical view  in  regard  to  this  one  particular  rela- 
tton,  the  sexual,  (a  view  which  they  would  promptly 
denounce  as  atrocious  in  any  other  association  or 
contact)  shows  us  very  plainly  what  miserable 
slaves  of  superstition  we  remain. 

Surely,  there  can  not  be  a  prompter  and  safer 
way  of  getting  rid  of  this  monstrous  farce  than 
the  proud  and  just  declaration  that  henceforth  we 
do  not  wish  to  be  owned,  nor  to  own  any  one,  for 
this  purpose.  Where  there  is  no  sexual  contract, 
and  no  sexual  "belonging  together"  is  presumed, 
there  cannot  be  any  deceit  in  sex-relations. 

2.  The  craving  to  choose  for  and  domineer 
over  a  human  being  causes  jealousy.  In  such  cases 
the  man  (or  woman)  generally  loves  the  being  of 
the  opposite  sex  in  the  same  sense  that  he  would 
"love"  a  beautiful  and  valuable  thing  which  is  his 


—  107  — 

property.  He  would  like  to  have  its  great  value 
appreciated  by  all;  he  wants  to  be  en  vied  its  pos- 
session, but  jealously  he  will  watch  over  it  and 
prevent  all  others  from  enjoying  that  beautiful 
"thing, "his  greatest  pleasure  consists  in  being  en- 
titled to  say  to  them:  "Do  not  touch  this,  it  is 
mine!" 

This  is  simply  meanness  and  depravity,  and 
any  submission  to  the  spirit  thus  manifested 
shows  miserable  weakness,  which  would  be  utterly 
impossible  with  free  men  and  women. 

3.  Where  jealousy  is  caused  by  genuine,  pas- 
sionate love  it  is  simply  the  fear  of  being  deprived 
by  a  more  successful  rival  of  the  enjoyment  of  love. 
Under  existing  circumstances,  the  lover  cannot 
satisfy  his  desire  (be  it  for  sexual  intercourse  or  a 
spiritual  union)  unless  he  gains  full  possession  of 
the  woman  (through  legal  or  illegal  marriage). 
Every  "friendly  look''  which  the  beloved  gives  to 
another  man  makes  him  tremble  for  fear  he  shall 
"lose"  her — with  the  kiss  the  other  lover  has  al- 
ready gained  a  certain  right  and  privilege,  so  that 
he  must  expect  to  lose  everything,  while  with  the 
act  of  sexual  intercourse  he  has  lost  everything — 
she  now  "belongs"  to  the  other  man  ;  possibly  he 
might  have  a  chance  to  "share"  her  with  another, 
but  that  must  of  course  appear  revolting  to  him, 
as  it  would  bring  disgrace  to  all  of  them.  Hence  it 
is  but  natural  that  he  should  jealously  endeavor 
to  keep  all  others  at  a  safe  distance  arid  that  he 
should  gladly  welcome  the  statute 'law  or  at  least 
the  moral  restraint  which  will  assist  him  in  this. 


—  108  — 

Suppose,  however,  that  the  lover  should  know 
that  no  victory  can  ever  give  to  him  or  to  anyone 
else  a  prescriptive  right  to  the  love  of  this  woman, 
that  no  love  contract  or  sexual  agreement  will 
ever  deprive  him  of  the  chance  to  enjoy  his  love — 
how  will  this  affect  his  feeling  of  jealousy?  It  will 
be  reduced  to  that  natural  selfishness  which  is  un- 
willing to  resign  an  enjoyment  for  the  benefit  of 
another.  Sexual  love  is  and  should  be  the  most 
selfish  in  this  respect,  but  it  is  also  that  love  which 
is  most  easily  and  most  quickly  satisfied.  With 
free  men  and  women  it  will  never  be  void  of  hope, 
will  never  require  permanent  resignation.  The  one 
and  only  means  by  which  to  gain  the  satisfaction 
of  it  is  to  create  the  responsive  desire  in  the  be* 
loved  being.  This  jealous  striving  to  gain  love 
may  cause  many  an  animated  contest,  but  it  will 
have  always  only  an  ennobling  influence.  So  far  as 
spiritual  intercourse  and  all  other  enjoj'ineuts  of 
love  are  concerned,  every  true  lover  in  the  present 
"moral"  society  even  is  quite  magnanimous,  and 
he  will  often  resign  a  desired  enjoyment  for  the 
benefit  of  another,  if  he  feels  sure  that  it  will 
not  endanger  his  property  rights  in  the  beloved 
Avornan,  (which  he  must  guard,  of  course,  as  they 
are  his  only  guarantee  that  he  will  have  the  chance 
of  enjoying  her  in  future).  That  his  generosity  does 
not  go  very  far  where  her  co-enjoyment  with  an- 
other man  is  in  question  is  not  due  to  his  depraved 
and  selfish  nature,  but  to  the  fact  that  such  co- 
enjoyment  must  appear  always  dangerous,  even  if 
it  is  "purely  spiritual."  True  love  is  naturally  mag- 


—  109  — 

nanimous,  it  has  the  decided  tendency  to  create 
what  would  be  termed  unselfishness,  but  this  fact 
does  not  show  itself  to  any  great  extent  to-day,  for 
the  simple  reason  that  it  is  equally  natural  that 
true  love  will  dread  nothing  more  than  to  be  de- 
prived of  every  chance — not  only  to  enjoy  with — 
but  also  to  give  happiness  to  the  beloved  being, 
through  that  being  becoming  the  property  of  an- 
other person.  In  a  free  society,  where  no  such  a 
thing  need  ever  be  dreaded,  we  would  soon  have 
the  pleasure  of  noticing  everywhere  that  a  great 
part — yes.  probably  the  greater  part— of  the  enjoy- 
ment of  love  consists  in  giving  joy  and  happiness 
to  the  beloved. 

Close  observation  must  promptly  convince  us 
that  in  many  cases — yes,  most  likely  in  the  major- 
ity of  cases — jealousy  is  absolutely  independent  of 
love,  and  furthermore  that  the  anguish,  bitterness, 
and  humiliation,  the  depraving  and  fatal  effects  of 
jealousy  are  not  due  directly  to  the  effort  to  gain 
or  retain  love,  but  in  nearly  all  instances  are  the 
result  of  the  struggle  for  the  possession  of  a  hum  an 
being. 

Let  us  give  up,  therefore,  this  idea  of  pos- 
session, not  merely  of  possession  through  legal  or 
moral  laws,  but  also  the  idea  that  the  love  or  the 
"tribute  of  love"  of  any  man  or  woman  is  due  to 
us.  Let  us  give  up  sexual  possession  ! 

We  need  not  be  astonished  that  the  Southern- 
ers were  so  reluctant  to  give  up  their  slaves,  for 
they  represented  for  them  an  immense  material 
wealth,  and  if  the  ancient  Teutons  had  been  asked 


—  110  — 

to  "emancipate'*  their  wives  they  certainly  would 
have  rebelled,  for  the  women  did  their  work  for 
them  and  were  about  as  valuable  in  this  respect 
as  the  slaves  were  to  the  Southern  planter — but 
it  seems  to  me  that  Freethinkers,  who  have  long 
acknowledged  that  woman  should  have  equal 
rights  with  man,  and  all  progressive  women 
should  gladty  welcome  the  idea  of  giving  up  this 
mutual  enslaving  which  causes  so  much  misery 
and  degradation  and  which  brings  no  benefits 
whatever  to  either  man  or  woman. 

It  may  here  be  claimed  that  sexual  possession 
has  one  advantage,  that  is.  that  it  secures  for  us 
an  easy  and  convenient  satisfaction  of  our  physi- 
cal desires  without  further  trouble  or  expense,  but 
I  think  that  any  man  or  woman  who  has  once 
tasted  the  exquisite  pleasure  of  Free  Love  will 
promptly  reject  such  a  "convenience." 

An  opponent  has  called  my  attention  to  the 
fact  that  I  have  advised  binding  contracts  be- 
tween man  and  woman  for  some  purposes,  that 
this  will  constitute  a  certain  degree  of  possession, 
and  hence  will  give  opportunity  for  some  jealous 
struggle  for  the  possession  of  human  beings.  Very 
true.  A  man  may  have  a  jealous  craving  for  a  cer^ 
tain  good  cook  and  housekeeper,  whom  another 
man  "possesses"  as  such  by  virtue  of  a  joint- 
household  contract — but  I  do  not  belies  e  that  this 
will  ever  cause  any  great  misery.  Furthermore, 
the  ardent  love  of  a  man  may  create  the  desire  to 
enter  into  family-relations  with  a  woman  who  is 
bound  in  this  respect  to  another  man  by  an  ex- 


—  Ill  — 

elusive  contract  (I  believe  that  under  the  existing 
economic  ciicumstances  such  contracts  will  often 
be  exclusive).  This  is  of  course  a  more  serious 
case,  especially  for  this  man,  because,  even  if  he 
should  gain  the  passionate  love  and  the  respon- 
sive desire  of  the  woman  this  will  not  justify  the 
latter  in  breaking  her  former  contract.  Resigna- 
tion will  generally  be  demanded  in  such  a  case, 
but  I  claim  that  the  longing  to  enter  into  family 
relations  is  not  one  of  the  direct  desires  of  love 
and  that,  if  the  latter  are  fully  satisfied,  the  non- 
satisfaction  of  the  former  will  never  wreck  the 
happiness  of  a  human  being  nor  create  a  disas- 
trous hatred  of  the  successful  rival.  The  direct  de- 
sire of  love,  be  it  ever  so  ardent  and  passionate,  is 
simply  intimate  social  and  eventually  sexual  in- 
tercourse, and  wherever  we  have  gained  perfect 
freedom  in  this  we  can  truthfully  say  that  wre  have 
Freedom  in  Love  and  that  wre  have  taken  from 
jealousy  its  poisonous  sting. 


XII. 
The  Old  and  the  New  Ideal. 


A  T  one  time  I  thought  that  with  the  forego- 
ing the  theory  might  be  considered  complete 
The  arguments  proved  to  be  absolutely  irrefutable 
(with  the  exception  of  a  few  minor  and  unimpor- 
tant points,  perhaps),  the  theory  fitted  into  any 
circumstance  and  applied  favorably  to  all,  young 
and  old,  rich  and  poor.  Hence  it  seemed  that  there 
were  no  more  obstacles  in  the  way  to  hinder 
prompt  action,  nothing  to  prevent  us  beginning 
at  once  the  "propaganda  of  deed  F '  But,  alas,  very 
soon  we  found  that  we  had  not  yet  investigated 
and  eradicated  the  most  deathly  poison  of  jeal- 
ousy, that  we  had  not  yet  attacked  the  most 
formidable  enemy — the  false  love-ideal.  More  tyr- 
annically than  legal  law,  more  effectively  than  any 
moral  feeling,  it  forces  humankind  into  slavery  in 
love,  into  mutual  possession ! 

In  the  first  chapter  of  this  book,  I  called  atten- 
tion to  the  fact  that  the  introduction  of  the  strict 
monogamic  marriage  had  the  result  that  constant 
exclusive  love  for  one  human  being  was  accepted 


—  113  — 

as  the  ideal.  Hence  the  saying,  "A  man  can  truly 
love  but  one  woman''  (and  vice  versa)  and  that 
other,  ''true  love  is  always  exclusive."  Where  this 
is  firmly  believed  (or  "felt  instinctively,"  as  some 
would  say),  it  is  sure  to  create,  even  in  the  most 
beautiful  love  relation,  even  under  the  most  favor- 
able circumstances,  bitter  pangs  of  jealousy,  from 
which  the  lovers  cannot  be  saved  by  any  other 
means  than  the  security  which  a  legal  bondage  or 
a  moral  restraint  affords  them.  This  is  what  has 
caused  the  final  reactionary  weakness  of  many 
ardent  advocates  of  Free  Love,  and  it  is  therefore 
of  the  utmost  importance  that  we  seriously  and 
searchingly  investigate  this  ideal. 

When  we  speak  of  true  love  between  a  man  and 
a  woman,  \ve  generally  mean  love  in  the  stricter 
sense  of  the  word,  that  is,  the  preference  of  one 
human  being  for  the  satisfaction  of  love's  desires. 
Hence  for  all  those  persons  to  whom  this,  the  sat- 
isfaction of  love's  desires,  appears  as  a  sacred  and 
inseparable  unity  (the  living  together  as  in  pres- 
ent marriage)  there  can  be  but  one  true  love,  i.  e., 
the  preference  for  one  human  being  for  such  living- 
together.  As  this  union  should  be  monogamous, 
the  preference  ought  to  be  very  positive  and  dis- 
tinct, or,  in  other  Avords,  the  love  should  be  de- 
cidedly exclusive,  and  furthermore,  as  such  a  union 
necessitates  a  long  duration,  the  love  must  be  con- 
stant in  orcler  to  be  "genuine,"  that  is,  of  real 
value. 

For  a  true  Freethinker,  however,  there  cannot 
be  any  reason  why  he  should  consider  all  these 


—  114  — 

actions  which  are  expected  to  be  included  in  this 
"living  together"  as  a  sacred  and  inseparable 
unity.  He  should  think  of  each  one  separately. 
He  will  then  find  that  there  are  many  diverse  co- 
operations and  co-en joyments  in  which  a  woman 
may  be  the  beautiful  counterpart  of  the  man, 
that  for  each  of  them  the  man  may  prefer  a  differ- 
ent woman,  and  that,  wherever  the  preference  is 
positive  and  distinct,  causing  a  passionate  attach- 
ment for  the  respective  person,  we  must  call  it 
love.  Therefore,  it  follows  that,  after  we  have  freed 
ourselves  from  superstition  and  do  not  make  one 
union  the  condition  for  entering  into  another,  a 
man  may  truly  love  several  women  at  the  same 
time! 

More  easily  and  probably  more  frequently 
than  any  other  motive  the  desire  for  that  one 
important  co-enjoyment,  sexual  intercourse,  will 
cause  such  passionate  attachment,  and  there  are 
many  persons  who  deem  this  alone  worthy  to  be 
termed  love,  who  have  but  a  sneer  for  "platonic 
love."  Hence  it  becomes  necessary  to  pay  partic- 
ular attention  to  this.  Sexual  love  is  dependent 
upon  the  sexual  impulse,  and  in  every  human  be- 
ing this  is  subject  to  such  continual  and  unavoid- 
able changes  (from  indifference  to  strong  desire), 
that  constancy  in  this  love  in  the  sense  of  the 
above  ideal  is  an  absolute  impossibility,  and  it  is 
a  dangerous  folly  to  expect  it.  For  many  practical 
reasons  it  is  equally  foolish  to  expect  that  this 
love  will  always  go  to  the  same  person  (If  you 
should  have  the  least  doubt  about  this, .just  ask 


—  113  — 

yourself  the  question  whether  it  would  be  reason- 
able to  expect  that  a  man  should  prefer  for  sexual 
intercourse  a  woman  who,  discouraged  and  debili- 
tated by  severe  illness,  had  no  sexual  desire  what- 
ever— even  if  he  fervently  loved  her.)  Furthermore, 
we  will  find  that  sexual  preference  may  be  caused 
by  many  different  qualities  of  body  and  mind,  and 
that  the  number  and  variety  of  motives  is  in- 
creased in  the  same  ratio  that  human  society  ad- 
vances in  what  \ve  generally  call  ''culture"  and 
"refinement,"  because  the  "spiritual"  or  intellec- 
tual enters  more  and  more  into  the  question  of 
sexual  preference.  Hence,  again,  it  follows  that  a 
number  of  different  women  ma}'  alternately  cause 
strong  sexual  love  in  one  man  (and  vice  versa,  of 
course).  It  is  not  necessary  to  investigate  the 
other  co-operations  of  man  and  woman  in  this 
respect,  as  it  will  be  admitted  without  further  ar- 
gument that  in  many  of  these  it  would  be  equally 
absurd  to  expect  that  a  free  choice  could  always 
mean  the  same  partner. 

The  result  of  our  investigation  is  therefore 
that,  although  love  in  the  stricter  sense  means 
the  decided  preference,  of  one  human  being  to  all 
others,  hence  may  be  called  exclusive,  this  exclu- 
siveness  refers  only  to  the  particular  union  or  co- 
operation for  which  the  choice  is  made — and  to  a 
particular  time — and  furthermore,  that  in  many 
co-operations  it  is  absurd  to  expect  that  th.e  same 
person  should  always  receive  the  exclusive  pre- 
ference. 

It  follows  that,  wherever  but  one  kind  of  love 


—  116  — 

union  between  a  man  and  a  woman  is  recognized 
(marriage)  and  no  other  is  ever  thought  of,  a  per- 
manent exclusive  love  of  one  woman  (or  man)  is 
possible,  that  is,  the  same  man  or  the  same  woman 
may  always  be  preferred  for  the  entirety,  the  whole 
marriage  relation.  But  it  further  follows  that,  so 
soon  as  we  have  the  courage  to  consider  each  kind 
of  love's  enjoyments  separately  and  allow  perfect 
freedom  of  choice  in  each,  it  becomes  an  absurdity 
to  expect  that  the  same  man  should  forever  prefer 
the  same  woman  for  every  co-enjoyment  and  co- 
operation. And  thirdly,  it  follows  that,  if  we  should 
resolve  to  give  the  term  love  to  no  other  feeling 
than  the  desire  for  sexual  intercourse,  it  will  al- 
ways be  decidedly  exclusive  for  the  time  being  (if  it 
is  the  real  feeling),  but  nature  itself  forbids  con- 
stancy and  stability  in  this,  and  it  is  a  practical 
impossibility  that  each  new  desire  should  go  to 
the  same  person  for  the  entire  duration  of  sex-life. 

We  must  choose,  therefore,  between  two  posi- 
tions : 

1 .  Ketain  the  first-named  of  the  foregoing  the- 
ories and  adhere  to  the  maxim  that  there  is  but 
one  kind  of  love-union,  which  must  include  all,  and 
which  we  generally  call  marriage.  Then  we  have 
good  reason  to  expect  exclusive  love  for  a  long 
time  in  many  cases  and  exclusive  love  for  life  un- 
der exceptionally  favorable  circumstances — even 
under  the  regime  of  so-called  Free  Love.  In  this 
case,  however,  a  moral  restraint  is  absolutely  ne- 
cessary to  guard  "weak  mortals"  from  forgetting 
in  "unguarded  moments"  that  they  are  not  al- 


—  117  — 

lowed  to  choose  whomsoever  they  may  prefer  just 
now  for  the  satisfaction  of  one  particular  passion- 
ate desire  (which  may  fill  all  their  thoughts  at  this 
moment),  but  that  the  only  question  which  they 
are  at  liberty  to  decide  is  this :  Whom  do  you  pre- 
fer for  the  entirety? 

2.  Real  freedom  in  love,  which  must,  neces- 
sarily, lead  to  variety  in  love-relations. 

We  want  this  real  freedom  in  love  because,  as 
we  have  seen,  it  will  bring  us  so  many  advantages, 
relieve  us  of  so  many  evils,  and  cause  us  no  harm. 
Why  then  should  this  one  word,  variety,  scare  us 
away  from  all  this  beautiful  Promised  Land  ? 

I  receive  this  answer : 

'•Because  it  interferes  with  the  generally  accep- 
ted Love-Ideal.  Every  youth  and  every  maiden 
throughout  the  civilized  world  is  educated  up  to 
this  ideal.  It  is  so  completely  made  a  part  of  their 
feelings  that  it  is  exceedingly  hard  to  eradicate. 
Your  argument  is  sound  and  practical,  but  love 
will  not  listen  to  practical  reasons." 

And  what  is  this  formidable  ideal,  which 
threatens  to  destroy  all  our  beautiful  plans,  be- 
cause love  will  not  listen  to  practical  reasons? 

I  receive  the  following  explanation  and  I  will 
henceforth  term  this 

THE  OLD  IDEAL: 

"It  is  not  merely  (as  some  coarse  and  vulgar 
natures  seem  to  suppose),  to  find  a  good  mate  for 
sexual  intercourse ;  it  means,  to  find  a  perfect  com- 
plement to  your  entire  being,  to  every  part  of  your 


—  118  — 

physical  and  spiritual  nature,  in  one  person  of  the 
opposite  sex.  It  means,  that  the  lovers  shall  for- 
ever be  "everything  to  each  other."  It  self-evi- 
dently  includes  spiritual  love,  sexual  love,  friend- 
ship, comradeship,  and  the  rest,  and  the  co-opera- 
tions, which,  as  you  think,  should  be  considered 
separately,  are  all  but  the  natural  result  of  such 
love.  We  know  that  such  love  is  possible,  and 
where  it  is  free  from  illusions,  it  will  last  for  life. 
The  ideal  state  which  we  desire  to  reach  is  one  in 
which  every  human  being  shall  enjoy  such  lov& 
and  in  which  every  loving  couple  shall  forever  ap- 
pear to  each  other  as  those  beings  which  men 
have  heretofore  placed  above  the  clouds,  and 
called  by  the  titles  "God"  and  "Goddess!" 

In  place  of  this,  the  old  ideal,  I  offer  the  follow- 
ing, which  will  demand  a  more  lengthy  explana- 
tion and  which  I  will  henceforth  call 

THE  NEW  IDEAL: 

It  certainly  is  not  to  gain  a  good  mate  for 
sexual  servitude  for  life;  neither  does  it  mean 
("as  some  coarse  and  vulgar  natures  seem  to  sup- 
pose") to  add  a  little  "spice"  to  the  sex-relation 
by  an  occasional  "piquant"  change  of  partners 
(that  is  the  safety-valve  for  your  ideal — in  a  free 
society  there  would  be  no  "piquancy"  in  such  a 
change).  It  means,  to  find  a  perfect  complement 
to  your  entire  individuality,  to  every  part  of  your 
physical  and  spiritual  nature,  but  we  neither  ex- 
pect nor  desire  to  find  all  this  in  one  human  being. 
This  might  be  possible  for  the  lower  species  of 


—  119  — 

humankiiid,  where  life  means  no  more  than  the 
satisfaction  of  the  physical  desires,  but  the  com- 
plex nature  of  the  civilized,  intelligent  man  or 
woman  of  to-day  requires  many  other  human  nat- 
ures to  furnish  it  what  it  needs  to  round  it  out 
into  wholeness  and  symmetry.  Hence,  wherever  we 
meet  a  sympathetic  person  we  will  endeaver  to 
find  in  him  or  her  something,  some  quality  or  abil- 
ity, which  forms  a  beautiful  complement  to  a  part 
of  our  own  being — and  wherever  we  find  it  we  will 
promptly  show  our  appreciation  of  and  our  enjoy- 
ment in  it,  being  convinced  that  in  a  society  freed 
from  superstition  it  may  truthfully  be  said  that 
"Love  worketh  no  harm."  We  think  it  an  idiotic 
vanity  for  a  man  to  imagine  that  he  might  per- 
manently appear  as  a  "God"  to  an  intelligent 
woman,  and  we  would  call  it  equally  ridiculous  if 
a  woman  should  think  that  she  might  be  the 
"Goddess"  of  a  sane  man  for  a  life-time. 

Having  these  convictions,  we  object  to  the 
definition  of  love  given  at  the  beginning  of  this 
chapter  as  too  narrow  and  superficial.  To  prefer 
one  human  being  to  all  others  for  any  certain  pur- 
pose may  cause  love,  but  it  is  not  love.  Love  is  the 
lively  appreciation  of  the  value  which  a  human  be- 
ing has  for  our  own  well-being.  Very  many  differ- 
ent things  may  cause  such  a  feeling,  but  the  at- 
tempt to  classify  Love  according  to  its  causes  ap- 
pears to  us  utterly  vulgar,  misleading,  and  useless, 
because  many  different  causes  may  result  in  the 
same  feeling,  the  same  love.  We  hear  of  sisterly  or 
brotherly  love  vs.  conjugal  love,  of  spiritual  vs. 


—  120  — 

sensual  love,  of  platonic  vs.  sexual  love,  and  so  on, 
but  these  distinctions  are  merely  arbitrary;  they 
are  extremely  vague,  embarrassing,  and  deluding, 
because  no  one  can  know  definitely  how  far  any 
affection  was  influenced  by  the  sensual  or  by  the 
sexual  instinct.  Hence  we  discard  such  a  classifica- 
tion and  we  do  so  gladly  because  of  course  for  us 
there  can  be  no  reason  why  we  should  have  any 
special  reverence  for  the  "purely  spiritual"  or  any 
disrespect  for  the  sensual  or  sexual.  Accepting  the 
foregoing  definition  of  the  word  and  excluding  as 
unworthy  of  the  name  of  love  the  craving  for  pos- 
session of  a  human  being  for  the  purpose  of  ruling 
and  controlling  that  being,  we  say  that  there  is 
but  one  kind  of  love,  although  there  is  a  vast  dif- 
ference in  the  intensity  of  the  feeling  as  well  as  in 
its  method  of  expression  and  its  constancy.  That 
love  which  can  truthfully  say  to  the  beloved:  "Thy 
happiness  is  my  happiness,  thy  woe  is  my  woe," 
being  both  fervent  and  constant  might  probably 
be  justly  termed  the  ideal  love,  but  there  is  no 
more  reason  why  this  should  exclude  other  love, 
when  existing  between  a  man  and  a  woman,  than 
when  it  appears  between  persons  of  the  same  sex 
or  between  a  mother  and  her  child.  How,  then 
shall  we  explain  the  rapturous  love^-songs  of  oui 
poets,  which  express  the  most  passionate  prefer- 
ence for  one  human  being,  in  which  there  can  be 
no  doubt  as  to  the  exclusiveness  of  the  affection, 
in  which  the  beloved  is  described  as  the  peerless 
"Angel"  or  "Goddess?" — Must  we  promptly  reject 
these  as  nonsense,  sham,  and  mockery,  or  will  we 


—  121  — 

declare  that  we  wise  people  would  never  reach  such 
a  foolish  enthusiasm  in  our  feelings?  Ah,  no;  every 
man  who  has  once  felt  real  passionate  love  for  a 
woman,  knows  that  the  "ravings"  of  the  poet  need 
not  necessarily  be  "exaggerations,  "that  they  may 
truthfully  express  his  thoughts  and  feelings.  Hence 
there  is  such  a  thing  as  passionate  exclusive  love? 
Yes,  and  where  it  receives  adequate  response  its 
enjoyment  is  so  extremely  blissful  that  we  may 
justly  term  it  the  ideal  enjoyment  of  love.  But  we 
promptly  reject  the  foolish  idea  that  such  a  pas- 
sion may  be  constant  (unless  it  is  a  constant 
craving  from  a  distance),  and  we  laugh  at  the  ab- 
surd and  futile  efforts  of  men  and  women  to  pre- 
serve this  passion  or  lengthen  its  enjoyment  by 
a  mutual  promise,  a  contract,  or  by  "living  to- 
gether." We  offer  this  explanation  of  the  poet'** 
feelings :  If  a  person  finds  or  believes  he  has  found 
in  another  a  perfect  complement  to  an  essential 
part  of  his  nature  it  will  cause  the  feeling  of  love. 
The  more  important  this  part  seems  to  the  lover 
the  more  fervent  the  love  will  be  and  it  will  appear 
exclusive  at  such  times  and  for  so  long  a  period 
(and  no  longer)  as  all  of  the  thoughts  and  feelings 
of  the  lover  are  centered  upon  the  desire  to  com- 
plement this  particular  part  of  his  being.  If,  at 
such  a  time,  the  lover  meets  the  beloved,  if  the  one 
fully  responds  to  the  feelings  of  the  other,  if  his  or 
her  thoughts  are  similarly  centered,  and  both  of 
them  freely  submit  to  the  spontaneous  desire  of 
the  moment,  they  wrill  then  reach  the  ideal  enjoy- 
ment of  love  They  will  be  "everything  to  each 


—  122  — 

other,"  they  will  "forget  all  the  world  around 
them  foi  each  other,"  each  will  fully  possess  the 
other,  each  can  truthfully  say:  "Thou  art  mine 
and  I  am  thine"  —  but  woe  to  the  lovers  who  be- 
lieve that  they  can  secure  such  happiness  for  the 
future  by  a  binding  contract  or  who  try  to  extend 
the  mutual  possession  beyond  the  continuance  of 
the  absolute  spontaneous  exclusiveness  in  their 
feelings;  they  will  gain  nothing  and  will  spoil  their 
chances  for  future  ideal  enjoyments.  Remember 
that  these  are  but  grand  and  beautiful  "moments 
in  our  lives,"  which  are  too  blissful  to  last  long. 

To  avoid  misunderstanding,  I  must  now  an- 
swer two  objections  to  my  elucidations  which  have 
come  to  my  notice: 

1.  Obj. — "There  are  many  cases  known  of  pas- 
sionate love,  which  lasted  for  a  long  time,  yes,  even 
for  life,  which  caused  the  lovers  much  agony  and 
misery,  and  which  could  not  be  overcome  by  will- 
power. This  shows  that  your  assertions  in  regard 
to  exclusiveness  are  not  correct." 

Answer. — I  have  already  alluded  to  the  fact 
that  the  constancy  of  passionate  exclusive  love 
may  last  a  longer  time  where  it  receives  no  gratifi- 
cation of  its  desires.  However,  where  this  is  real 
constancy  in  the  feelings,  where  it  does  not  merely 
mean  frequent  spells  of  strong  desire  intermingled 
with  many  practical,  prosaic  thoughts  and  aspira- 
tions (which  is  generally  the  case)  it  is  sure  to 
cause  insanity  or  death  in  a  short  time.  My  re- 
marks refer  only  to  fully  reciprocated  love  having 
unrestricted  freedom  for  spontaneous  action,  and 


—  123  — 

I  claim  that  for  such  my  assertion  will  prove  true 
in  every  case,  that  the  duration  of  real  exclusive- 
ness  in  the  feelings  of  lovers  is  a  question,  not  of 
days,  but  of  hours,  that  the  attempt  to  keep  these 
feelings  continuously  active  causes  mere  shams, 
and  that  the  artificial  means  applied  for  the  pur- 
pose are  extremely  harmful.  I  have  already  des- 
cribed in  what  manner  the  enthusiastic  believers 
in  the  old  ideal  manage  to  create  a  sham  exclu- 
siveness  for  a  long  time  or  for  life  even. 

2.  Obj. — "Your  description  of  the 'grand  mom- 
ents' is  neither  more  nor  less  than  an  undue  glori- 
fication of  sensual  pleasures." 

Answer. — I  most  emphatically  deny  this.  They 
may  be  what  you  call  "purely  spiritual:''  under 
favorable  circumstances  they  may  be  realized  even 
by  two  persons  of  the  same  sex  without  any  sens- 
ual thoughts.  If  you  understood  my  remarks  to 
be  merely  a, description  of  a  beautiful  sexual  inter- 
course, then  you  have  made  a  great  mistake,  for 
they  mean  infinitely  more.  Many  men  and  women 
have  thus  ideally  enjoyed  love  (even  under  present 
perverted  conditions)  without  any  thought  of  sex- 
ual intercourse  and  many  more  will  do  so  in  the 
future. 

No,  these  ideal  enjoyments  need  not  neces- 
sarily include  sexual  intercourse,  and  free  men  and 
women  will  do  more  to  establish  this  fact  than  all 
your  religious  and  moral  codes  have  ever  done. 
On  the  other  hand,  we  claim  that  each  and  every 
sex-act  which  an  intelligent  human  being  does  en- 


—  124  — 

joy  should  be  the  result  and  the  climax  of  such  a 
"grand  moment." 

Very  often  indeed  that  which  you  call  sensual- 
ity will  do  a  great  deal  to  bring  such  "grand  mom- 
ents," and  it  is  exactly  for  this  reason  that  we  do 
not  share  your  contempt  of  the  word  and  what 
it  implie§.  Of  course  the  present  unnatural  moral 
code,  which  by  its  absurd  and  tyrannical  restraint 
causes  so  much  abnormal  and  morbid  craving, 
could  not  fail  to  have  the  result  that  very  often 
the  only  thought  filling  the  minds  of  accordant 
lovers  is  the  desire  for  physical  pleasures.  In  such 
cases  the  ideal  enjoyment,  7.  e.,  the  perception  and 
appreciation  of  the  valuable  complement,  will  be 
of  such  extremely  short  duration  that  it  will  not 
satisfy  the  human  being  endowed  with  a  higher 
intellect  than  that  of  the  lower  animals.  It  is  the 
so-called  "spiritual"  or  mental  element  in  man 
which  enables  him  to  enjoy  this  greatest  pleasure, 
(to  perceive  and  fervently  appreciate  life  beautiful 
counterpart  in  another  human  form),  for  hours  in- 
stead of  a  few  minutes.  We  have  no  contempt  for 
"merely  physical"  enjoyment;  it  is  beautiful  in- 
deed, but  we  are  convinced  that  in  freedom  every 
person  of  even  only  moderate  intelligence  will 
promptly  perceive  how  vastty  this  pleasure  may 
be  enhanced  and  prolonged  by  the  addition  of  the 
"spiritual"  element;  the  former  will  never  be  the 
sole  object  of  man's  thoughts  after  we  have  dis- 
carded the  tyrannical  sexual  compulsion,  which 
directly  forces  many  a  person  to-day  to  make  the 
one  object,  the  satisfaction  of  his  "merely  phy- 


—  125  - 

sical"  desires,  his  or  her  special  and  all-absorbing 
study. 

In  conclusion,  I  will  say  that  a  certain  degree 
of  sensual  sympathy  is  always  necessary  for  the 
ideal  enjoyment  of  love.  For  this  reason  it  will 
'  happen  far  more  frequently  between  a  man  and  a 
woman  (even  the  so-called  "merely  spiritual"  en- 
joyments) than  between  persons  of  the  same  sex. 

To  sum  up  our  conclusions  regarding  exclu- 
siveness  in  love:  In  a  free  society  genuine  love  will 
never  be  exclusive.  A  person,  free  from  supersti- 
tion, who  truly  loves  one  human  being  is  very  well 
able  to  love  many  more.  What  may  appear  as  ex- 
clusiveness  is  but  the  temporary  concentration  of 
the  thoughts  on  one  subject,  which  in  love  as  in  all 
other  pleasures,  is  essential  for  the  highest,  the 

ideal  enjoyment.  * 

*         * 

Christian  marriage  and  the  old,  superstitious 
love-ideal  will  forever  retain  for  each  other  the 
relation  of  cause  and  effect.  As  I  have  said,  the 
former  naturally  produced  the  latter,  and  I  will 
add  that,  wherever  the  minds  of  men  and  women 
are  still  dominated  by  the  latter,  the  unnatural 
"exclusive-love-for-one-ideal/'  it  invariably  leads 
to  Christian  marriage  or  to  a  farcical  imitation  of 
it,  which  is  still  worse ! 

In  most  "civilized"  countries  the  exclusive  con- 
trol of  the  marriage  relation  has  now  passed  from 
the  hands  of  the  priests  to  those  of  the  trifle  less 
''sacred''  State.  Wherever  this  change  has  taken 
place  it  has  been  hailed  with  joy  by  all  Freethink- 


—  126  — 

ers  as  a  great  advance,  but  it  would  be  ridiculous 
to  claim  that  this  change  has  in  any  way  "puri- 
fied" marriage  or  made  it  a  nobler  institution. 

Indissoluble  Christian  marriage  was  never  a, 
general  success,  it  always  caused  demoralizing  hyp- 
ocrisy and  terrible  agonies,  and  it  became  more 
and  more  unendurable  as  men  and  women  pro- 
gressed in  education.  Hence,  wherever  the  people 
had  some  influence  in  the  matter,  government 
gradually  became  a  more  lenient  master,  so  that 
finally  in  many  states  (as  in  Wisconsin)  a  divorce 
can  be  obtained  quite  easily.  Here  again  I  must 
state,  however,  that  the  assertion  that  we  will  find 
the  most  happy  and  beneficient  marriages  where 
divorce  can  be  effected  most  easily,  is  nowhere  sub- 
stantiated by  facts. 

And  that  most  important  progressive  step, 
the  "free  union"  of  the  Free-Lovers,  what  has  that 
shown  to  us?  Experience  has  clearly  proved  it  to 
be  but  a  farcical  imitation  of  Christian  marriage, 
for  which  a  real  success  is  utterly  impossible. 

The  "platform"  of  the  Free-Lovers  may  be 
thus  briefly  summarized :  "We  oppose  any  and  all 
legal  interference  with  love-affairs,  we  assert  for  all 
men  and  women  the  moral  and  legal  right  to  con- 
summate and  dissolve  love-unions  the  same  as 
other  contracts  and  agreements."  I  heartily  agree 
with  this,  and  I  feel  profound  admiration  for  and 
am  grateful  to  those  noble  men  and  women  who, 
even  under  the  existing  unfavorable  conditions, 
had  the  courage  to  act  upon  their  convictions,  but 
I  regret  that,  in  making  use  of  the  freedom  which. 


—  127  — 

in  many  cases  they  bought  so  dearly,  they  could 
conceive  of  no  better  system  than  an  imitation  of 
Christian  marriage,  one  whose  ideal  was  to  "live 
together  as  husband  and  wife,"  to  be  "everything 
to  each  other"  in  the  realm  of  love. 

Let  us  now  examine  the  supposed  advantages 
which  theory  claimed  for  the  "free  unions,"  and  see 
whether  practical  experience  verified  the  prophecy. 
Theory  said:  ''1.  —  If  their  love  is  found  to  have 
been  a  mistake  or  if  mutual  affection  ceases,  no 
prostitution  will  follow,  as  they  are  free  to  part 
and  enter  into  more  suitable  unions.  2. —  The  fear 
of  losing  each  other  will  guard  them  against  the 
indifference  and  lack  of  courteous  attention  so 
common  in  legal  marriage.  3. — If  their  love  is  gen- 
uine it  will  last  and  they  will  be  a  happy  couple 
for  life." 

Practical  experience  proved  every  one  of  these 
arguments  to'  be  a  fallacy.  1. — It  was  found  that 
many  a  man,  although  otherwise  inclined,  con- 
tinued to  cohabit  with  the  woman  simply  because 
he  valued  very  highly  his  home  and  his  house- 
keeper, that  many  a  woman,  although  sexual  love 
had  ceased,  still  "granted  favors"  to  the  man, 
simply  because  she  warmly  appreciated  him  as 
her  comrade  and  help-mate  or  as  the  father  of  her 
child, 'and,  furthermore,  that  many  a  sexual  rela- 
tion was  continued  for  no  other  cause  than  prac- 
tical economic  considerations.  In  all  these  cases 
the  "prostitution"  necessarily  appeared  far  more 
humiliating  than  where  the  "marital  relation"  was 
considered  a  sacred  dutv  for  life. 


—  128  — 

2. — It  was  soon  found  that  there  is  an  immense 
difference  between  wooing  the  love  of  a  free  human 
being  and  the  fear  of  losing  the  affection  of  a  su- 
perstitious man  or  woman  already  won.  While  the- 
former  is  elevating  and  ennobling,  the  latter  is- 
humiliating  and  depraving.  The  striving  to  gain 
the  love  of  a  human  being  (not  the  possession) 
will  call  into  action  the  noblest  part  of  man's  or 
woman's  nature,  but  where  love  enjoys  a  hearty 
reciprocative  feeling  it  should  be  free  from  doubts 
or  fears  in  order  to  be  truly  beautiful,  and  the  con- 
stant fear  of  losing  the  possession  of  a  valued  per- 
son (as  in  the  case  of  the  "free  union")  will  always 
have  the  tendency  to  arouse  the  meanest  and 
basest  propensities  in  human  nature.  I  will  state 
right  here  that,  although  I  fully  perceive  the  great 
danger  and  the  possibility  of  the  horrible  results 
of  a  relation  in  which  the  lovers  "take  each  other 
for  life,  for  better  or  worse,''  I  can  still  see  some- 
thing beautiful,  something  of  real  value  in  that 
association,  while  the ''living  together"  in  the  "free 
unions,"  in  which  the  lovers  are  asked  in  their 
most  blissful  moments  to  consider  the  possibility 
of  a  "mistake"  and  the  probability  of  a  change  in 
the  feelings,  appears  to  me  as  a  farcical  imitation, 
\vhich  discards  the  good  and  retains  the  evil  feat- 
ures of  the  original  institution.  » 

3. — The  saddest  disappointments  were  in  store 
for  those  Free-Lovers  who  accepted  as  true  the 
third  supposition,  for  they  found  that,  where  "free- 
dom of  choice"  was  not  a  meaningless  phrase,  not 
a  single  love  proved  to  be  ''genuine."  The  "living 


—  129  — 

"together"  in  the  "free  unions"  turned  out  to  have 
about  the  same  abating  effect  on  passionate  love 
as  had  the  "living  together"  in  real  marriage,  and 
wherever  a  couple  fully  realized  their  freedom,  kept 
up  an  intimate  social  intercourse  with  others,  and 
saw  no  reason  to  guard  against  a  warmer  feeling 
towards  any  one,  it  was  only  a  question  of  a  short 
time  when  one  of  them  would  "fall  in  love"  with 
another  man  or  woman  and  dissolve  the  union.  In 
such  a  case  the  theory  demanded  from  the  dis- 
carded partner  prompt  resignation,  a  gracious  ac- 
ceptance of  the  results  of  "freedom  of  choice,"  and 
a  fair  settlement  of  whatever  economic  associa- 
tion there  might  be,  but  experience  showed  very 
plainly  that  this  is  far  more  easily  preached  than 
practiced.  The  man  who,  for  months  or  years,  has 
been  accustomed  to  find  at  his  home,  when  he 
returns  from  his  daily  labor,  a  partner  willing  to 
minister  to  his  physical  and  spiritual  wants,  a 
friend,  who  shares  his  woes  and  joys,  may  be  sens- 
ible of  a  remarkable  cooling  off  in  his  feelings  to- 
wards this  partner,  his  passionate  love  may  have 
long  since  changed  into  a  decidedly  quiet  friend- 
ship— nevertheless,  when  he  learns  that  he  is  to  be 
discarded  for  another,  that  his  partner  has  re- 
solved to  "give  herself"  to  another,  he  will  feel  far 
more  inclined  to  shoot  the  woman,  the  preferred 
lover,  or  himself  (even  if  he  is  a  very  good-natured 
fellow  otherwise)  than  to  swallow  in  serene  resigna- 
tion the  bitter  pill.  And  on  the  other  hand,  the 
woman  watches  with  great  anxiety  the  wooing  of 
another,  which  she  fears  may  rob  her  of  the  love  of 


—  130  — 

her  partner.  If  he  should  show  considerable  inter- 
est in  another  woman,  if  he  should  happen  to  give 
to  that  woman  a  look  of  enthusiastic  admiration, 
she  will  tremblingly  ask  the  question,  "Does  he 
love  her?"  Woe  to  her,  if  she  believes  that  the  an- 
swer must  be  "yes,"  that  would  be  equivalent  to 
the  loss  of  his  love,  for  of  course  "he  cannot  truly 
love  two  women!"  And  if  he  should  really  leave 
her,  she  will  soliloquize  thus:  "I  surely  believed 
that  his  love  made  him  all  my  own,  but  his  love 
was  not  genuine,  it  was  false,  for  another  woman 
possesses  him  now!" — and  all  her  enthusiasm  for 
the  cause  of  freedom  can  not  deliver  her  from  the 
tortures  of  jealousy  nor  make  sweet  the  bitter 
humiliation  of  desertion  by  her  lover,  of  defeat  by 
another  woman.  An  uncontrollable  hatred  must 
be  the  result.  In  all  such  cases  jealousy  proved  to 
be  altogether  too  "natural"  to  be  overcome  by 
theories.  For  these  reasons,  wherever  such  a  "free 
union"  meant  more  than  a  short  concubinage  for 
the  sole  purpose  of  mutual  sexual  satisfaction,  it 
either  ended  in  a  tragedy,  or  the  dread  of  such  a 
tragedy  influenced  the  couple,  for  the  sake  of  pre- 
serving their  union,  to  cautiously  guard  them- 
selves against  any  loving  inclination  towards 
others,  Avhich  of  course  was  equivalent  to  giving" 
up  their  freedom  in  love. 

These  experiences  in  the  Free  Love  movement 
have  found  several  different  explanations,  which 
have  forced  the  acceptors  of  the  theory  into  vari- 
ous courses  and  according  to  which  we  can  divide 
them  into  the  following  classes : 


—  131  — 

Class  1  we  will  term  the  "Ultra-Exclusivists." 
These  men  and  \vomen  have  not  repudiated  their 
principles;  they  still  oppose  any  and  all  legal  in- 
terference with  love-affairs;  they  still  affirm  the 
moral  and  legal  right  of  every  man  and  woman 
to  consummate  and  dissolve  love-unions  with  the 
same  freedom  as  other  contracts,  in  order  that  all 
may  have  a  chance  to  promptly  correct  mistakes 
in  "mating,"  which  are  always  liable  to  occur  with 
erring  men — but  they  now  sing  with  glowing  en- 
thusiasm the  praises  of  the  Old  Ideal,  the  exclusive 
love  for  life  of  one  companion,  and  consequently 
of  life-long  monogamic  marriage;  wherever  true 
sympathy  exists  between  a  man  and  a  woman 
they  consider  this  ideal  worthy  of  a  great  many 
sacrifices.  I  have  already  shown  in  what  manner 
these  persons  manage  to  preserve  their  exclusive- 
ness. 

I  will  promptly  admit  that  this  is  a  progres- 
sive step  to  substitute  conscience  and  voluntary 
self-control  for  the  rule  of  the  State  in  the  attempt 
to  sustain  mouogamic  marriage,  but  a  theory 
which  goes  no  farther  than  this  does  not  relieve 
us  of  a  single  one  of  the  many  social  evils  des- 
cribed in  this  book,  and  what  I  said  of  the  "Happy 
Marriage  of  To-day"  is  equally  true  of  the  most 
fortunate  "mating"  in  these  unions. 

2.  The  second  class  is  composed  of  the  "Puri- 
tans." These  people  noticed  that  in  almost  every 
case  the  "failure"  of  the  "free  unions"  was  caused 
by  the  sexual  impulse,  which  is  so  deplorably  un- 
steady and  unreliable!  Most  of  these  couples  would 


—  132  — 

have  been  quite  contented  to  belong  to  each  other 
for  eternit3r,  if  some  ''devilish  sensual  charm"  in 
others  had  not  caused  them  to  forget  all  the  good- 
ness of  their  partners !  Hence  this  class,  with  more 
consistency  than  wisdom,  concluded,  a  la  Tolstoi, 
that  this  "base  impulse,"  the  sexual  instinct, 
which,  with  its  frivolous  whims,  caused  all  the  dis- 
turbance, should  be  reduced  to  the  minimum  in  all 
men  and  women. 

I  have  disposed  of  these  ascetics  in  a  previous 
chapter,  but  fairness  demands  that  I  should  state 
something  which  speaks  in  their  favor.  So  far  as 
a  free  and  unrestrained  intercourse  between  the 
sexes  is  concerned,  many  of  these  hyper-spiritual 
beings  have  reached  really  enviable  conditions. 
They  are,  in  fact,  the  only  consistent  moralists.  I 
say:  Do  not  try  to  force  this  impulse  into  an  un- 
natural course  (neither  by  "self-control"  nor  by 
legal  or  moral  restraint);  give  it  a  chance  for  nat- 
ural action  and  you  will  find  that  it  is  truly  beauti- 
ful ;  they  say:  "Kill  it !"  Both  views  may  be  called 
logical,  consistent  conclusions  drawn  from  the  ex- 
periences of  human  society  and  either  course  would 
give  us  freedom  in  the  social  intercourse  of  men 
and  women  (and  no  other  way  will  lead  us  to  this 
goal).  I  believe  that  I  have  given  sufficient  reasons 
why  the  ascetic  solution  should  be  promptly  re- 
jected. 

3.  The  "Theorists."  This  class  contains  by  far 
the  greatest  number.  They  have  noticed  the  "fail- 
ures," and  their  explanation  is  extremely  simple: 
"The  unjust  economic  conditions  in  general  and 


—  133  — 

woman's  dependent  position  in  particular  are  to 
blame!'  They  fully  uphold  the  theory,  but  they 
have  given  up  as  useless  all  active  propaganda  in 
its  behalf.  They  say:  ''Let  us  work  for  economic 
freedom.  After  having  attained  that,  freedom  in 
love  \vill  be  the  logical  result." 

Probably  no  other  factor  has  caused  so  much 
weakness  and  reaction  in  the  ranks  of  the  Free- 
Lovers  as  such  superficial  and  fallacious  argu- 
ments as  these.  Conventional  marriage  is  of  course 
to  a  great  extent  an  economic  question,  and  econr 
omic  dependence  is  therefore  an  important  barrier 
to  freedom  in  marrying,  but  it  is  an  absurdity  to 
claim  that  it  is  the  only  barrier.  Do  you  really 
wish  to  assert  that  it  \vasan  economic  difficulty, 
which  nearly  drove  to  insanity  that  man  whose 
partner  discarded  him  to  live  with  another?  Was 
it  economic  dependence  which  aroused  such  bitter 
hate  in  the  heart  of  that  jealous  woman?  No,  there 
are  other  difficulties  which  make  it  an  absolute  im- 
possibility to  retain  for  life  freedom  to  obey  the 
desire  of  the  heart  in  the  choice  of  a  partner  with 
whom  to  "live."  Suppose  for  a  moment  that  we 
had  ideal  economic  conditions  now.  KarlHeinzen's 
theory  could  then  be  put  into  practice.  Every 
youth  of  eighteen  could  take  a  wife,  live  with  her 
so  long  as  he  loved  her,  and  part  from  her  when 
he  got  tired  of  her  or  fell  in  love  with  another.  And 
the  woman,  seeing  that  there  is  "no  money  in  it" 
either  way,  would  say  "good  bye"  with  a  pleasant 
smile  and  promptly  look  around  for  another  hus- 
band. A  very  pretty  theory  indeed  ! — but  it  is  hard 


134- 

to  understand  how  any  person  with  a  fair  know- 
ledge of  human  nature  can  have  the  least  faith  in 
such  illusions,  and  the  fact  that  so  many  intelli- 
gent men  still  persist  in  saying;  that  economic  free- 
dom will  promptly  settle  all  these  difficulties,  shows 
ver3r  plainly  that  they  have  not  given  very  much 
serious  thought  to  the  important  subject  of  love 
and  sex-relations. 

For  freedom  in  love  there  are  many  far  more 
formidable  enemies  than  our  unjust  economic  con- 
ditions. 

In  regard  to  women,  I  claim  this:  Give  to  all 
the  women  of  our  country  absolute  economic  in- 
dependence and  you  have  not  given  them  freedom 
in  love,  you  have  not  even  given  to  the  Free  Lov- 
ers among  them  a  constant  "freedom  of  choice"- 
but,  give  to  all  women  freedom  in  love  as  I  under- 
stand it  (/.  e.,  simply  deliver  them  from  the  super- 
stitions in  this  sphere)  and  in  less  than  a  year 
they  will  have  far  more  economic  independence 
than  the  men  can  boast  of  now ! 

4.  The  "Deserters,"  that  is  to  say,  those  men 
and  women,  who  on  account  of  the  failures  have 
deserted  the  cause  of  freedom  in  theory  as  well  as 
in  practice.    It  is  with  great  satisfaction  that  I 
make  the  statement  that  this  class  contains  by  far 
the  smallest  number.  The  number  of  failures  in  the 
old  system  is  so  enormous  that  any  person  who 
has  once  studied  the  system  will  stand  by  the  new 
theory  in  spite  of  the  saddest  disappointments. 

5.  The  "Varietists."  These  are  certainly  the 
most  progressive  thinkers  among  the  Free  Lovers. 


—  135  — 

They  love  freedom  too  much  to  be  satisfied  with 
the  theory  of  class  One,  who  simply  change  the 
name  of  the  tyrant;  they  know  too  much  of  human 
nature  to  belong  to  class  Two;  they  have  given  too 
much  serious  thought  to  the  subject  to  be  satis- 
fied with  the  "poor  excuse"  of  class  Three,  and  they 
have  too  much  faith  in  liberty  to  desert  the  cause. 
Hence  they  have  accepted  that  general  result  of 
their  experiments,  the  inconstancy  of  love  wher- 
ever there  was  real  freedom,  not  as  a  sign  of  seri- 
ous mistakes,  but  as  the  natural  and  truly  benefi- 
cient  condition  to  which  the  human  mind  should 
become  accustomed.  "Variety  is  the  spice  of  life/' 
"we  like  variety  in  all  other  pleasures  and  enjoy- 
ments, why  not  in  love  also;''  "sex-magnetism  is 
neutralized  after  awhile  and  then  a  change  of  part- 
ners is  necessary  to  give  it  new  strength."  These 
and  .similar  arguments  were  offered  and  in  some 
casfs  they  may  have  soothed  somewhat  the  fury 
of  that  dangerous  enemy  of  freedom,  Jealousy.  It 
is  certainly  due  to  the  Yarietists  that  the  "propa- 
ganda of  deed"  of  the  Free-Lovers  did  not  result  in 
a  general  failure.  Their  theory  must  be  regarded 
as  a  repudiation  of  the  old  ideal  or  at  least  of  a 
part  of  it.  Although  they  still  indorse  a  certain 
^'belonging  together,"  they  do  not  say  that  to  be 
the  ideal  state  it  must  last  for  life,  but  are  satis- 
fied if  it  lasts  but  a  year  or  a  month.  If  they  had 
gone  but  one  step  farther  and  declared  that  it 
could  and  should  last  but  a.  few  hours  in  each  in- 
stance, they  would  have  seized  the  fundamental 
truth,  and  would  not  have  thought  any  "living 


—  136  — 

together"  necessary  for  the  purpose.  As  it  is,  how- 
ever, they  also  have  retained  this  worst  part  of 
the  old  ideal.  Of  course  in  the  carrying  out  of  such 
a  theory  they  were  hampered  even  more  than  the 
other  classes  by  the  existing  economic  conditions. 
The  restriction  of  freedom  of  action,  which  a  home 
and  household,  joint  financial  interests,  and,  above 
all,  a  family  relation,  necessarily  involved,  made  it 
often  quite  impossible  to  effect  the  "change"  which 
the  heart  desired  and  the  theory  sanctioned.  It 
is  evident  that  in  this  respect  woman  is  at  a  far 
greater  disadvantage  than  man,  and  it  seems  that- 
the  main  hope  of  all  Yarietists  lies  in  acquiring  an 
absolute  economic  independence  for  women.  As  to 
the  question  how  to  reach  such  a  condition  there 
is  yet  an  immense  difference  of  opinion. 

As  I  do  not  wish  to  be  misunderstood,  I  must 
add  that  the  above  remarks  refer  only  to  the  the- 
ories of  the  Varietists  so  far  as  they  in  any  man- 
ner have  been  offered  to  the  public.  I  do  not  doubt 
that  some  of  them  rejected  the  old  and  accepted 
the  new  ideal  long  before  I  thought  of  it,  and  that 
they  have  acted  according  to  their  convictions 
and  probably  even  expressed  their  views  to  others. 
I  certainly  do  not  care  to  claim  the  honor  of  a  new 
discovery ! 

After  having  thus  given  a  short  illustration  of 
the  different  courses  of  the  Free-Lovers,  I  will  now 
try  to  show  the  mistakes  which  caused  their  fail- 
ures. 

My  criticism  maybe  summed  up  in  these  words: 
They  have  tried  to  live  in  freedom  according  to  an 


—  137  - 

ideal  which  originated  under  the  most  tyrannical 
compulsion,  and  which  never  could  have  entered 
into  the  minds  of  intelligent  human  beings  with- 
out such  compulsion. 

In  their  observations  and  the  conclusions 
drawn  therefrom,  they  made  the  fatal  mistake  of 
supposing  that  the  weak  point  of  marriage  is  its 
indissolubility  or  the  difficulty  of  dissolution.  The 
fact  is,  that  the  difficulty  of  dissolution  is  the  only 
feature  of  marriage  which  gives  to  the  institution 
a  certain  value,  and  that  the  weak  point  of  mar- 
riage is  marriage  itself. 

In  reality,  their  Free  Love  meant  no  more  than 
Free  Marriage.  This  being  a  contradiction  in  itself, 
it  is  of  course  impossible  of  attainment. 

Another  mistake,  which  has  not  done  so  much 
harm  but  ought  to  be  noticed,  is  that  the  impor- 
tance of  legal  interference  has  been  over-estimated 
by  all  Free  Lovers.  As  to  the  "control"  and  "reg- 
ulation" of  the  love-affairs  and  sex-relations,  our 
government  has  never  played  any  other  part  than 
that  of  a  ridiculously  awkward  and  miserably  vul- 
gar clown,  who  has  enacted  a  disgusting  farce 
whenever  he  tried  to  "settle"  anything  in  this  line, 
and  who  has  not  one-tenth  part  of  the  influence 
on  the  love-  and  sex-relations  of  the  people  that 
the  Free-Lovers  ascribe  to  him. 

And  the  remedy  which  I  propose?  It  is  so  ex- 
tremely simple  that  it  is  a  wonder  that  it  was  not 
applied  long  ago.  Discard  marriage  altogether; 
then  it  will  be  a  matter  of  utter  indifference  to  you 
whether  government  pleases  to  make  divorce  quite 


—  138  — 

easy  or  impossible.  Discard  the  old,  superstitious 
love-ideal  and  accept  the  new  one;  then  firmly  re- 
solve to  be  free  in  love  and  you  me  free;  find  a 
number  of  other  men  and  women  who  have  freed 
themselves  from  superstition  and  you  can  make 
full  use  of  your  freedom  in  spite  of  all  the  priests 
and  governments  in  the  world!  No  "civilized" 
country  has  any  law  which  forces  you  to  make 
any  sexual-  or  love-contract,  no  government  in 
the  world  will  bother  about  your  love-affairs,  and 
even  the  power  of  the  Czar  of  all  the  Russias  will 
not  be  sufficient  to  control  or  regulate  your  sex- 
ual relations  if  you  cease  to  be  so  foolish  as  to 
give  notice  to  the  world  when  you  desire  to  enjoy 
love  in  this  manner.  And  as  to  Home,  Household, 
and  Family,  you  should  not  forget  that  these  are 
to  a  great  extent  economic  affairs  and  hence  must 
be  dependent  upon  the  economic  conditions  sur- 
rounding you.  For  these  you  should  make  such 
contracts  as  may  appear  advantageous  for  the 
present  and  future.  It  is  true  of  course  that  any 
such -a  contract  means  a  restriction  of  your  per- 
sonal liberty,  but  it  is  equally  true  that,  under  ex- 
isting circumstances,  you  secure  thereby  in  many 
cases  so  many  other  liberties,  that  the  net  balance 
maybe  even  an  increase  of  your  freedom  of  action. 
To  be  perfectly  explicit,  I  must  state  that  by 
discarding  marriage  I  mean  of  course  the  discard- 
ing of  any  and  all  sexual  living  together  (which  in 
fact  is  the  essence  of  marriage),  and  I  here  chal- 
lenge all  Freethinkers  to  show  me  the  least  ad- 


—  139  — 

vantage  in  such  ''living  together."  Discard  this, 
accept  the  new  love-ideal,  and  you  have  the  per- 
fect solution  of  one  of  the  most  important  of  all 
social  questions! 


XIII. 
Ethical  Views  on  Coition, 


A  S  a  result  of  Christian  teachings,  the  great  ma- 
•^  jority  of  "civilized"  people  still  believe  that 
the  sex-act  is  something  so  vile  and  unclean  that  a 
decent  person  ought  to  be  ashamed  to  mention  it. 
In  sharp  contrast  to  this  view,  most  of  the  Free 
Lovers  have  given  to  the  act  such  an  exalted  posi- 
tion that  this  has  become  as  dangerous  to  true 
freedom  in  love  as  the  former  view.  In  most  of  the 
valuable  treatises  on  this  subject  which  argue  in 
favor  of  freedom,  we  find  that,  wherever  the  ethical 
view  of  coition  is  given,  it  is  referred  to  as  the  act 
•'which  gives  origin  to  a  new  life."  This  is  a  seri- 
ous blunder,  which  is  sure  to  cause  confusion- 
Whatever  opinion  you  may  hold  in  regard  to  the 
"intentions  of  nature,"  or  of  what  the  conditions 
should  be,  you  should  remember  that,  if  we  wish 
to  reform,  we  must  deal  \vitli  facts  and  not  with 
illusions — and  the  fact  is,  that  not  one-fiftieth  part 
of  the  sex-acts  are  procreative  acts ;  furthermore, 
that  the  relation  is  not  very  liable  to  be  materially 
changed  in  the  future  unless  the  continence-enthu- 
siasts should  advance  far  better  arguments  for 


—  141  — 

their  theory  than  they  have  given  to  us  so  far. 
Let  us  cease  these  futile  efforts  to  gain  respect  by 
deception.  The  fact  that  it  is  natural,  that  it  gives 
us  joy,  and  that  it  engenders  love,  should  be  suffi- 
cient to  free  the  mind  of  every  radical  thinker  from 
all  contempt  of  the  sex-act,  despite  the  scurrilous 
aspersions  of  the  fanatics. 

The  sex-act  of  itself  is  neither  vile  and  unclean 
nor  anything  particularly  beautiful  or  noble,  least 
of  all  anything  lofty  or  sacred ;  it  is  simply  the  sat- 
isfaction of  a  natural  impulse,  the  same  as  eating 
and  drinking.  The  fact,  however,  that  for  a  beauti- 
ful satisfaction  of  this  desire  Ave  need  the  loving  in- 
clination of  another  human  being  and  that  the  de- 
light of  the  gratification  consists  not  only  in  re- 
ceiving, but  as  much  in  bestowing  pleasure,  gives 
to  the  hunger  for  sexual  intercourse  an  immense 
ethical  value  (in  sharp  contrast  to  the  desire  to 
eat  and  drink),  but  let  us  not  forget  that  this 
value  can  be  utilized  only  where  the  freedom  of  the 
individual  in  this  respect  is  limited  neither  by  legal 
nor  moral  laws  nor  by  any  contract  or  relation. 

In  order  to  attain  a  natural  and  unconstrained 
intercourse  between  the  sexes, freed  from  the  dread 
of  love  and  all  abnormal,  unhealthy  cravings,  a 
sound  and  rational  conception  of  the  natural  func 
tion  is  of  the  utmost  importance.  Both  of  the 
unwarranted  extremes,  "dragging  it  through  the 
mire"  and  "raising  it  above  the  clouds"  are  decid- 
edly dangerous;  they  are  very  liable  to  cause  ab- 
normal nervous  excitement  and  morbid  illusions. 

There  is  not  the  slightest  danger  that  any  free 


'—  142  — 

woman  will  ever  forget  how  vastly  the  importance 
of  coition  is  increased  in  those  exceptional  cases  in 
which  it  becomes  a  procreative  act.  Give  her  the 
power  to  decide  in  every  case  whether  it  shall  be 
merely  an  amorous  enjoyment  or  a  generative  net 
and  you  may  rest  assured  that  the  latter  will  al- 
ways receive  the  reverent  attention  which  it  de- 
serves. 

Another  grave  error  which  the  Free-Lovers  are 
very  apt  to  make  is  to  insist  upon  such  sayings  ;is 
"love  alone  can  sanctify  a  sexual  embrace."  This 
is  also  extremely  vague  and  misleading.  The  con- 
clusion which  will  always  be  drawn  from  such  a 
sentence  is  "love  does  always  sanctify  a  sexual  em- 
brace," and  this  is  either  presuming  an  absurdly 
narrow  conception  of  the  word  '"love"  or  it  again 
leads  to  that  disastrous  error  that  the  inevitable 
result  of  mutual  love  between  a  man  and  a  woman 
must  be  sexual  intercourse.  Fervent  love  may  exist 
between  a  man  and  a  woman  and  still  coition  with 
each  other  might  be  a  "degradation, "yes, it  might 
even  rank  below  the  sexual  enjoyment  of  another 
couple  who  would  not  deserve  to  be  called  lovers. 

The  one  and  only  justification  of  coition  is 
spontaneous  mutual  desire  for  the  association. 

If  we  should  say,  "Love  alone  can  justify  a 
man  and  a  woman  in  entering  into  family  ivla- 

«. 

tions  ( i.  e.,  joining  interests  in  the  rearing  and  ed- 
uca,ting  of  children),  or  in  establishing  a  home  and 
a  common  household,  or  in  joining  purses  and 
taking  a  trip  to  Europe  together.,"  we  could  sub- 
stantiate these  assertions  fully  as  easily  as  the 


—  143  — 

foregoing  quotation  from  the  arguments  of  the 
Free-Lovers  could  be  sustained,  but  they  also 
would  have  to  be  called  unwise  and  misleading. 
This  idea  of  presuming  that  a  particular  union  or 
co-operation  or  a  number  of  them  must  neces- 
sarily result  from  any  true  love  between  a  man 
and  a  woman  has  grown  to  be  such  a  dreadful 
tyrant  that  we  should  carefully  beware  of  making 
remarks  which  are  apt  to  popularly  strengthen 
that  assumption.  If  you  are  bound  to  show  some- 
thing which  true  love  will  always  do,  if  you  must 
have  some  formula  (I  cannot  see  the  necessity), 
then  let  it  be  no  other  than  this :  "True  love  al- 
ways desires  to  promote  the  happiness  of  the  be- 
loved!" 


XIV. 
Love  and  Friendship  in  Free  Society. 


TN  the  second  part  of  the  chapter  on  "Our  Chil- 
dren,"  I  have  given  brief  suggestions  for  educa- 
tion in  a  "free  society,"  so  far  as  sexuality  is  con- 
cerned, and  have  mentioned  the  beneficient  results 
of  such  a  change  from  present  methods.  This  is 
nothing  new,  of  course.  Thousands  of  intelligent 
men  and  woman  are  convinced  that  it  is  the  only 
manner  in  which  we  can  expect  ever  to  make  ed- 
ucation truly  conducive  to  health  of  mind  and 
body,  that  it  is  the  best  way  of  guarding  our  child- 
ren against  the  dangers  of  sex-life.  The  great  ma- 
jority of  these  reformers,  however,  do  not  seem  to 
realize  that  such  "knowing"  youths  and  maidens, 
who  are  truly  healthy  in  mind  and  body,  after  they 
have  reached  the  normal  development  of  their  sex- 
nature,  will  demand  with  irresistible  force  the  full 
and  natural  satisfaction  of  their  natural  impulse. 
For  the  adherents  of  the  old  love-ideal  this  will  for- 
ever cause  a  sad  dilemma,  but  in  our  free  society 
we  have  no  reason  to  deplore  this  fact.  On  the  con- 
trary, we  shall  watch  with  intense  pleasure  and 
satisfaction  the  development  of  this  beautiful  im- 


—  145  — 

pulse,  which  throws  sucli  a  glorious  embellishing; 
light  upon  all  the  members  of  the  opposite  sex, 
which  fills  our  youths  and  maidens  with  such  a  fer- 
vent desire  to  appear  as  good,  as  noble,  as  beauti- 
ful, as  they  can  in  order  to  gain  the  love  which 
their  hearts  crave.  We  have  given  them  all  our 
knowledge  of  how  to  lead  a  healthful  and  happy 
sex-life;  we  have  freed  them  from,  the  dangers  of 
unnatural  piquant  charms,  which  might  lead  them 
to  morbid  sensuality;  we  have  taught  them  to 
consider  their  freedom  in  love  as  their  most  pre- 
cious, inalienable  right,  and  hence  we  can  say  to 
them  without  doubt  or  anxiety,  "Love  never 
worketh  harm!  For  you,  free  men  and  women, 
there  is  no  necessity  to  guard  your  hearts  against 
any  sympathy  or  love.  Give  freely  and  unre- 
servedly whatever  you  have  of  these  feelings,  and 
you  will  be  sure  to  receive  a  beautiful  recompense." 
As  to  the  quantity  and  character  of  the  physical 
actions  of  love,  in  a  free  society,  I  do  not  claim  to 
know  anything,  but  I  do  claim,  that  these  actions 
almost  without  exception,  will  mean  the  satisfac- 
tion of  natural  spontaneous  desires,  and  therefore 
whatever  course  they  may  take  or  however  fre- 
quent they  may  appear,  they  will  "work  no  harm." 
I  have  previously  shown  what  will  prevent  the 
youth  from  indulging  in  sexual  action  before  hav- 
ing reached  full  maturity  (aside  from  the  influence 
of  parents  and  older  friends,  which,  of  course,  will 
be  quite  powerful).  As  to  the  young  maidens,  nat- 
ure itself  has  given  them  a  valuable  protection. 
For  them,  the  first  initiation  into  the  physical 


—  146  — 

pleasures  of  love  is  associated  with  some  bodily 
pain.  In  a  free  society  full  development  only  will 
make  the  desire  strong  enough  to  create  the  will- 
ingness to  suffer  the  pain.  Under  existing  circum- 
stances, or  so  long  as  "submission"  is  considered 
the  unavoidable  "tribute  of  love,"  this  natural 
protection  is  of  course  valueless. 

One  of  the  first  acts  of  "independence"  ot  our 
young  girl,  after  she  has  reached  sexual  maturity, 
will  be  to  demand  one  little  room  as  quite  her 
own,  which  she  will  adorn  with  all  her  feminine 
skill  and  make  it  a  cozy  retreat  for  her  "ideal  en- 
joyments of  love,"  and  in  which  she  will  receive  as 
her  visitor  any  man,  woman  or  child  with  whom 
she  wishes  to  be  alone.  Having  fortified  her  with 
a  thorough  knowledge  of  herself,  and  having  in- 
stilled into  her  heart  keen  enthusiasm  for  freedom 
in  love,  the  parents  or  guardians  will  gladly  grant 
her  the  opportunity,  feeling  sure  that,  whenever 
further  advice  or  assistance  from  them  is  needed, 
it  will  be  promptly  and  confidingly  asked  of  her 
instructors. 

Of  course  our  young  woman  will  experience  the 
same  change  in  her  feelings  towards  the  opposite 
sex  as  does  the  girl  of  to-day;  she  will  also  notice 
that  the  company  of  men  begins  to  have  a  pecu- 
liar charm  for  her,  but  she  will  see  nothing  "dan- 
gerous" in  the  condition,  nor  will  it  cause  her  any 
morbid  brooding  or  hysterical  illusions.  At  first, 
she  may  feel  somewhat  timid  and  bashful,  dread- 
ing that  she  may  not  be  able  to  arouse  any  recip- 
rocal affection  in  a  sympathetic  man.  Very  soon, 


—  147  - 

however,  she  will  attain  ease  and  confidence,  being- 
buoyed  up  by  the  joyful  perception,  that  her  own 
strong  and  healthy  desire  for  love  gives  to  her  per- 
son such  a  charm  that  it  always  enables  her  to 
gain  the  love  of  some  congenial  man.  She  will  fully 
appreciate  the  great  advantage  of  frank  and  un- 
restrained social  intercourse  with  mam^  free  men 
and  women,  which  gives  her  cheerful  hope  and  fer- 
vent trust  (instead  of  the  unrealizable  and  un- 
healthful  illusions  of  the  conventional  girl),  which 
prompts  her  to  the  extremely  pleasant  and  remu- 
nerative endeavor  to  find  some  beautiful  counter- 
part of  herself  in  every  sympathetic  person,  and 
which  enables  her,  whenever  she  has  found  such 
counterpart,  be  it  spiritual  or  physical  or  both,  to 
enjoy  him  to  her  heart's  content  without  any  fear 
or  anxiety,  and  without  thereby  placing  upon 
herself  any  oppressive  fetters.  And  whenever  she 
wishes  to  enjoy  the  company  of  a  man,  at  day  or 
night,  where  she  will  be  secure  from  the  intrusion 
of  others,  she  will  not  hesitate  to  invite  him  to  her 
room  or  accompany  him  to  his.  This  will  not  ne- 
cessarily mean  sexual  intercourse,  it  may  not  mean 
any  love-union  whatever,  but,  if  it  is  love,  which 
has  caused  the  wish  for  the  tete-a-tete,  and  if  the 
spontaneous  desire  of  both  has  led  them  to  the 
highest  physical  enjoyment,  there  will  be  no  reason 
for  sadness  or  repentance.  They  incur  thereby  no 
new  responsibilities,  no  new  duties,  they  part  as 
they  met,  free  human  beings,  who  have  not  barred 
themselves  by  foolish  promises  or  oaths  from  any 


—  148  — 

joys  and  pleasures  which  this  beautiful  world  may- 
be able  to  offer  them  in  future. 

I  am  afraid  that  some  would-be  students  of 
human  nature  may  here  accuse  me  of  "naivete" 
and  wish  to  enlighten  me  thus:  "That  might  be 
beautiful,  but  it  is  impossible  because  it  is  unnat- 
ural. If  a  refined  woman  has  once  shared  such  joys 
with  a  man  she  will  never  afterwards  be  indifferent 
to  him ;  she  will  feel  instinctively  that  she  now  be- 
longs to  him  for  life.  It  is  only  where  all  the  finer 
qualities  of  woman's  nature  have  been  killed  by 
vulgar  surroundings  or  terrible  experiences  that  it 
is  possible  for  her  to  freely  change  her  lovers  with- 
out severe  pain." 

In  answer  to  such  remarks,  I  would  say:  Re- 
member that  the  parting  of  the  lovers  in  this  case 
does  not  imply  the  dissolution  of  any  "relation" 
as  you  understand  the  word,  and  that  it  never  will 
be  interpreted  as  meaning  freedom  to  "choose  an- 
other in  exchange  for  the  present  mate."  As  ex- 
plained in  a  previous  chapter,  we  certainly  expect 
our  lovers  to  continue  to  love  each  other  (and  so 
will  they,  although  they  might  consider  it  ridic- 
ulous and  superfluous  to  swear  to  it),  but  wre  con- 
sider it  an  absurd  idea  to  think  that  this  must  dis- 
qualify them  forever  for  seeing  anything  beautiful 
and  love-worthy  in  others.  If  your  remarks  about 
the  refined  woman  of  to-day  are  true  (and  I  believe 
that  they  are)  then  they  mean  that  she  feels  that 
she  will  love  this  man  forever,  and  as  you  have 
taught  her  that  the  only  legitimate,  the  only 
moral,  yes,  the  only  possible  way  of  enjoying  his 


—  149  — 

love  is  to  belong  to  him  exclusively,  the  two  thing's 
may  well  appear  as  the  same  to  her.  Free  her  from 
your  abominable  superstition  and  we  will  have 
good  reason  to  rejoice  over  the  original  ''natural" 
inclination.  I  hold  further,  that  this  is  not  a  par- 
ticularly feminine  characteristic,  and  that  in  a  free 
society  it  would  be  equally  true  of  the  masculine 
sex.  If  the  men  of  to-day  do  not  justify  this  belief, 
it  is  simply  because,  with  the  great  majority  of 
them,  the  first  sexual  pleasures  are  such  a  miser- 
able mockery  of  what  we  \vould  call  the  ideal  en- 
joyments of  love  that  their  "finer  qualities"  had 
no  occasion  to  show  themselves,  and  have  in  many 
cases  been  killed  altogether. 

Think  of  the  health}*,  lusty  youth  of  to-day, 
who,  after  having  finished  his  day's  labor,  feels  an 
intense  longing  for  physical  union  with  a  woman! 
What  will  he  do?  He  may  torture  himself  in  sleep- 
less nights  with  the  hard  and  bitter  fight  against 
his  "sinful"  thoughts;  he  may  be  forced  to  resort 
to  self-abuse;  he  may  give  his  wages  for  several 
days  of  hard  labor  to  a  prostitute,  who  (probably 
with  an  ironical  smile  at  his  juvenile  impetuosity) 
will  promptly  and  quickly  give  him  a  satisfaction, 
which  leaves  no  other  after-taste  than  shame,  dis- 
gust, self-reproach,  and  the  contempt  of  the  woman 
he  has  just  carressed;  or  he  may  "seduce"  a  "weak" 
girl,  in  which  case  either  his  honor  leads  him  to  a 
depraving  slavery  in  misery  and  poverty,  or  the 
justifiable  dread  of  the  latter  forces  him  to  sneak- 
ing hypocrisy  and  deceit.  What  other  way  is  there 
open  for  him? 


—  150  — 

What  will  such  a  youth  do  in  a  free  society? 
He  will  go  into  the  most  respected  and  self-respect- 
ing society  of  the  town  and  would  look  around 
among  the  fairest  and  best  women  there.  For  the 
poor  youth  of  to-day  that  would  of  course  be  a 
decidedly  useless  and  extremely  humiliating  course, 
for  he  would  see  on  all  of  the  women  there  one  of 
the  following  labels:  "Hands  off,  property  of  Mr. 
— ,"  "Property-rights  applied  for, "and "Reserved 
for  the  eternal  possession  of  an  ideal  man,  who  can 
support  a  family."  In  our  society,  however,  not  a 
single  woman  will  be  thus  labeled,  hence  our  youth 
will  promptly  exert  himself  to  win  the  one  he  thinks 
the  prettiest  and  best  of  them  all  for  a  beautiful 
love-idyl.  His  warm  affection  for  the  chosen  one 
may  not  always  be  able  to  arouse  the  reciprocal 
feeling,  but  it  will  have  to  be  shown  in  a  very  awk- 
ward manner  to  be  anything  but  pleasant  and 
agreeable  to  any  free  woman  to  whom  it  is  ad- 
dressed. But  why  should  he  not  have  excellent 
chance  for  success,  seeing  that  our  tastes  in  re- 
gard to  the  "prettiest  and  best"  are  fortunately 
so  extremely  varied,  and  seeing  how  easily  this 
youth  can  be  made  "the  happiest  of  mortals!" 

Suppose,  however,  that  he  does  not  succeed. 
Even  that  will  not  cause  a  calamity.  Whenever  a 
man  is  certain  that  no  property  rights  of  any  kind 
are  to  blame,  the  fact  that,  in  spite  of  his  ardent 
wooing,  his  love  gains  no  response,  will  always 
abate  his  passion  to  quite  an  extent. 

How  will  it  be  though,  if  another  man,  who  has 
for  the  time  being  engrossed  all  the  thoughts  of 


—  151  - 

the  beloved  woman,  is  the  cause  of  his  defeat?  Will 
he  then  pursue  the  preferred  suitor  with  bitter  ha- 
tred and  murderous  thoughts  of  revenge?  Certainly 
not,  for  these  are  the  feelings  engendered  by  the 
struggle  for  the  possession  of  a  human  being,  and 
will  be  utterly  impossible  where  the  new  love-ideal 
is  accepted.  Will  he  withdraw  despondingly  into 
his  lonely  chamber,  filled  with  bitter  contempt  for 
the  world  in  general  and  woman  in  particular? 
Xo,  for  he  is  not  imbued  with  that  silly  idea  that  a 
man  must  find  "everything"  in  one  woman.  As  the 
sexual  impulse  developed  within  himself  independ- 
ently of  any  particular  love,  it  will  not  be  extin- 
guished by  the  peremptory  "Xo"  of  one  woman. 
The  disappointment  may  somewhat  weaken  the 
impulse  for  a  short  time,  but  very  soon  it  will  lead 
him  with  renewed  energy  and  courage,  if  not  to  the 
"best, "then  to  the  iwxt-bv*t.  This  course  of  action 
need  not  diminish  his  hope  to  win  the  "best"  in  the 
future,  while  a  persecution  of  the  present  victor 
would  of  course  be  out  of  the  question,  as  that 
would  be  the  one  and  only  sure  way  to  spoil  his 
chances. 

The  next-bestl  I  am  afraid  that  some  young- 
woman  reader  will  be  terribly  shocked  when  she 
reads  this.  What  a  profanation  it  may  seem  to  her 
of  that  grand  love-passion,  which  prefers  death 
to  the  thought  of  another. 

Such  a  theory  may  indeed  rob  many  of  your 
sensational  novels  of  the  unwholesome  charm  of 
lugubrious  romance,  and  make  them  appear  ra- 
ther silly  instead  but  in  the  beautiful  reality  of  a 


—  152  — 

free  society  you  will  fiiid  no  pleasure  in  indulging 
in  such  unhealthful  and  eccentric  imaginings.  Think 
of  society  as  it  really  is  to-day  and  ask  yourselves 
the  question  how  much  actual  choice  there  is  for 
men  and  women  in  that  momentously  important 
concern  of  mating  for  life,  and  you  will  have  to  ad- 
mit that  there  is  nothing  terrible  in  the  fact  that 
our  hero  is  perfectly  satisfied  with  the  "second 
choice"  among  all  the  women  of  his  acquaintance. 
Do  you  not  know  that  in  the  majority  of  your 
most  beautiful  love-matches  the  bridegroom  could 
actually  not  be  considered  as  any  better  than 
about  the  twenty -fifth  choice  of  the  woman  for  sex- 
intercourse,  if  \ve  should  suppose  that  she  had  per- 
fectly free  choice  among  all  men?  You  might  reply, 
that  although  this  may  really  be  so,  the  bride  is 
not  conscious  of  the  fact  and  feels  for  the  time  be- 
ing that  this  is  her  one  and  only  choice.  To  this  I 
would  answer  that  there  is  no  reason  why  our  hero 
should  not  feel  just  the  same  for  the  time  being. 
For  him  this  would  be  perfectly  sufficient  for  an 
ideal  enjoyment  of  love  without  the  possibility  of 
a  bitter  after-taste,  while  for  the  fashionable  bride 
the  future  may  prove  the  choice  to  have  been  a 
fatal  mistake  resulting  in  life-long  pain  and  misery. 
I  believe  that  Oliver  Wendell  Holmes  was  very 
nearly  correct  when  he  said  :  "Nature  makes  every 
man  love  all  women  and  trusts  the  trivial  matter 
of  special  choice  to  the  commonest  accident,"  and 
he  was  equally  right  when  he  added:  "Young  fel- 
lows have  hung  a  matrimonial  millstone  round 
their  necks,  taking  it  for  a  life-preserver!" 


—  153  — 

The  task  of  our  young  man  might  appear  far 
more  difficult  if  he  should  happen  to  be  a  stranger 
in  the  place,  but  it  would  not  be  so  in  fact.  In  a 
free  society  people  will  of  course  become  acquainted 
with  each  other  far  more  easily  than  to-day  and 
nobody  there  would  have  to  remain  a  stranger  for 
a ny  long  period.  Free  women  will  not  be  afraid  of 
men  any  more  than  men  are  afraid  of  their  own 
sex  to-day,  probably  even  far  less  so.  Our  young 
friend  will  have  no  trouble  either  in  finding  the  per- 
sons with  whom  he  wishes  to  become  acquainted. 
As  a  natural  result  of  freedom  in  love,  there  will  be 
far  more  public  gatherings  and  far  more  attention, 
will  be  paid  to  the  establishment  and  artistic 
adornment  of  public  meeting-places,  amusement- 
halls,  and  the  like  than  to-day.  It  would  be  a  great 
mistake  to  assume  that  the  influence  and  power  of 
the  sexual  instinct  becomes  apparent  only  when 
there  is  actual  present  desire  for  sexual  inter- 
course. In  every  well-balanced  man  or  woman  it- 
will  give  at  all  times  a  highly  agreeable  sensual 
charm  to  the  opposite  sex  and  even  those  who  are 
sexually  weak  are  very  probably  much  mistaken  if 
they  think  that  the  pleasure  which  the  company  of 
a  woman  affords  them  is  merely  "spiritual."  I  be- 
lieve, therefore,  that  in  a  free  society  men  will  spend 
almost  their  entire  leisure  hours  in  the  company  of 
women.  I  can  hardly  imagine  any  social  gathering 
where  the  society  of  wromen  would  not  be  agreeable 
to  free  men,  and  a  public  place  of  amusement  "for 
men  only"  must  be  considered  as  almost  out  of  the 
question  in  a  free  society.  Some  women  readers 


—  154  — 

might  think  that,  to  make  this  true,  the  men  of 
to-day  would  have  to  be  completely  remodeled,  but 
this  would  be  a  mistake.  Under  existing  circum- 
stances, if  a  man  does  not  happen  to  be  in  the 
rna,rket  for  a  house-wife  and  is  too  conscientious 
to  "seduce"  or  play  the  part  of  a  Don  Jmm,  the 
society  of  all  the  "labeled"  women  can  indeed  have 
but  very  little  attraction  for  him  and  must  be  ex- 
tremely disagreeable  to  him  in  many  cases,  but  re- 
move the  labels,  remove  the  icy  barriers,  and  the 
men  (and  the  women  also)  will  promptly  remodel 
themselves,  and  their  places  for  public  meetings 
will  soon  be  grand  and  beautiful  temples  of  joy, 
where  the  ever-charming  wooing  of  sexual  love  is 
embellished  by  music,  song,  and  dance,  where 
an  animated  spiritual  intercourse  can  take  place 
amidst  surroundings  made  delightful  to  all  the 
senses  by  genius  and  artistic  skill. 

Having  removed  all  the  foolish  barriers  of  su- 
perstition, natural  inclination  will  constantly  draw 
men  and  women  together  and  free  and  unrestrained 
social  intercourse  will  enable  them  to  become  per- 
fectly acquainted  with  each  other.  Hence  they  will 
have  the  best  possible  chance  to  form  ties  of  friend- 
ship, which,  as  Karl  Heinzen  truthfully  savs,  are 
most  beautiful  and  most  satisfactory  when  exist- 
ing between  a  man  and  a  woman.  Quite  often  the 
first  incitement  to  such  friendship  may  be  received 
in  the  intimate  intercourse  of  a  sexual  co-enjoy- 
ment resulting  from  sensual  love,  but  true  friend- 
ship needs  neither  such  a  beginning  nor  any  future 
sexual  co-eniovments  to  secure  its  constancv  and 


—  loo  — 

stability.  Its  first  manifestation  will  be  a  profound 
interest  in  the  weal  and  woe  of  the  friend,  an  in- 
timate, confidential  exchange  of  ideas,  of  all  the 
thoughts  and  experiences  which  agitate  their  minds 
(a  grand  enhancement  of  their  joys,  a  soothing- 
balm  for  all  their  sorrows,  wherever  they  are  sure 
of  fervent  sympathy) — and  may  lead  them  to  many 
different  co-operations  and  co-enjoyments,  but  cer- 
tainly to  none  which  do  not  appear  mutually  ad- 
vantageous to  them.  They  may  wish  to  live  nearer 
to  each  other;  he  may  desire  a  home  of  his  own, 
she  may  like  house-keeping  as  a  vocation  or  as 
part  of  it  —  and  they  establish  a  joint  home  and 
household.  For  this  they  will  of  course  make  an 
economic  contract  (not  necessarily  a  legal  one). 
Not  to  do  so  Avo.uld  appear  as  foolish,  unjust  and 
unworthy  of  them  as  if,  because  they  loved  each 
other,  the  man  should  employ  the  woman  as  a 
clerk  in  his  business  without  any  stipulation  or 
agreement.  They  may  also  wish  to  enter  into  a 
family-relation  with  each  other,  which  certainly 
requires  a  business  contract.  But  by  this  time 
their  confidence  and  sympathy  may  have  become 
so  strong  that  a  joint  purse  or,  in  fact,  a  perfect 
communism  in  regard  to  material  interests  be- 
tween them  is  the  result.  "Thy  joy  is  my  joy,  thy 
woe  is  my  woe!''  This  feeling  may  have  been  so 
strongly  aroused  in  them  after  some  years  of  in- 
timate association  of  interests,  that  it  brings  a 
comradeship-contract  for  life.  To  the  superficial 
observer  this  may  seem  to  be  a  regular  marriage, 
but  there  is  a  vast  difference  between  the  two  con- 


—  15G  — 

tracts.  Some  of  their  economic  contracts  may  be 
exclusive,  but  they  do  not  resign  the  liberty  to  en- 
joy the  love  of  any  human  being,  and  there  is  no 
such  thing  as  a  sexual  contract,  nor  any  sexual 
living  together.  If  both  of  our  friends  are  sexually 
strong  and  healthy  they  may  often  vein,  each  other 
for  sexual  intercourse,  but  be  they  ever  so  different 
in  their  sexual  strength  and  inclinations  it  will  not 
destroy  their  union. 

It  is  no  marriage,  but  neither  is  it  a  "free 
union"  as  the  "Free-Lovers"  advise  it. 

1  will  now  try  to  illustrate  by  an  example  the 
important  difference  between  such  a  living  together 
and  a  "free  union": 

Mr.  A.  and  Mrs.  B.,  both  enthusiastic  adherents 
of  the  theory  of  freedom,  fall  in  love  with  each  other, 
hence,  without  asking  for  the  consent  of  state  or 
society,  they  promptly  agree  to  "live  together  as 
lovers."  If  you  should  ask  a  number  of  Free-Lov- 
ers about  the  real  meaning  of  this  latter  phrase, 
you  will  receive  some  amusingly  diverse  answers. 
Some  will  readily  admit  that  it  means  "to  live  to- 
gether as  husband  and  wife,"  but  the  majority  will 
object  to  these  obnoxious  terms.  After  you  have- 
persistently  rejected  all  the  evasive  answers  which 
are  generally  given,  you  Avill  find  that  it  means 
neither  more  nor  less  than  a  "sexual  living  to- 
gether," a  mutual  sexual  possession,  an  exclusive 
sexual  contract,  which  holds  good  so  long  as  mut- 
ual love  exists  between  the  couple.  After  having 
arrived  at  a  clear  understanding  of  the  intendment 
of  the  relation,  I  can  now  proceed  with  the  story.. 


—  157  - 

After  the  two  have  lived  together  for  some  time 
Mr.  C.,  who  is  also  a  Free-Lover  and  an  intimate 
friend  of  Mr.  A.,  arrives  in  the  city.  Mr.  A.,  who  is 
very  proud  of  his  cosy  home,  promptly  invites  his 
friend  to  it  and  asks  him  to  spend  his  leisure  hours 
there.  The  guest  begins  to  like  the  pretty  young 
hostess,  who  of  course  tries  her  best  to  please  the 
friend  of  her  mate ;  his  feelings  towards  her  grad- 
ually become  warmer  until  finally  they  culminate 
in  a  passionate  love.  And  the  woman? — well,  six 
months  of  "living  together"  has  somewhat  "neu- 
tralized" the  "sex-magnetism"  between  the  mates 
(as  always  will  be  the  case,  even  if  the  love  be 
extremely  fervent  and  passionate);  Mr.  A.,  who  is 
conceited  enough  to  feel  perfectly  safe  in  his  love- 
relation  and  who  is  always  fully  satisfied  sexually, 
has  been  somewhat  indifferent  and  prosaic  of  late, 
his  mind  being  filled  with  scientific  problems  or 
business  speculations,  while  Mr.  C.,  who  has  been 
"degage"for  some  time,  is  full  of  impetuous  virility 
and  has  plenty  of  leisure  for  attentive  courtesies 
and  ardent  wooing.  In  brief,  he  soon  perceives  that 
he  need  not  despair.  The  young  woman  becomes 
nervous,  fidgety,  wavering,  and  finally  admits  to 
herself  that  her  love  has  now  "changed  to  an- 
other!" What  will  be  the  result?  Either  a  clandes- 
tine relation  (in  plain  words,  a  mean  and  wily  de- 
ception), which  degrades  the  character  and  must 
sooner  or  later  end  in  a  tragedy,  or  Mrs.  B.  has 
the  moral  courage  to  inform  Mr.  A.  in  due  time 
that  she  now  "loves  another"  and  hence  must  "live 
with  another."  Theory  demands  that  the  rejected 


—  158  — 

lover  swallow  the  bitter  pill  with  noble  magnanim- 
ity, that  he  promptly  make  room  for  the  other 
man  and  part  "as  a  friend" — 'but  in  nine  cases  out 
of  ten  a  tragedy  is  the  result.  In  the  tenth  case  the 
sugar-coating  of  theory  may  enable  the  man  to 
take  the  pill  in  quiet  resignation,  but  it  will  not 
neutralize  its  poisonous  contents;  the  "friendship" 
will  always  remain  in  an  extremely  delicate  condi- 
tion and, furthermore,  the  happiness  of  the  woman 
will  be  diminished  considerably  by  the  conscious- 
ness of  owing  her  new  joy  to  a  painful  and  humili- 
ating sacrifice  on  the  part  of  the  man  whom  she 
formerly  loved. 

Tragedies  resulting  from  "free  unions"  are  cer- 
tainly no  rare  occurrences,  but  I  will  gladly  admit 
that  they  are  not  the  rule  (as  might  be  expected). 
Sometimes  the  man  feels  very  far  from  "safe"  and 
finds  means  to  keep  all  competitors  at  a  safe  dis- 
tance; in  some  cases  the  enthusiasm  for  the  ex- 
clusive-love-ideal  furnishes  an  effective  preventive; 
and  in  most  cases  the  consciousness  that  a  part- 
ing would  mean  a  general  disturbance  of  pence 
of  mind,  and  derangement  of  business  perhaps  in- 
volving severe  losses,  is  sufficient  to  cause  the 
partners  to  guard  themselves  instinctively  against 
any  "dangerous"  approaches  of  others  and  to- 
wards others.  Furthermore  it  must  be  expected 
that  Mr.  C.,  being  a  Free-Lover,  "knows  himself 
and  knows  something  about  human  nature  in  gen- 
eral, and  that  he  may  be  too  conscientious  or  too 
good  a  friend  to  wilfully  disturb  a  satisfactory 
union.  Hence  be  may  put  on.  the  brakes  in  diia 


"""^    j.  O  • ../ 

time,  L  e.,  at  the  appearance  of  the  first  danger- 
signal.  He  will  promptly  place  the  conventional 
iceberg  between  himself  and  the  woman  and  when 
he  fears  that  even  this  may  melt,  he  will  simply 
stay  away  and  will  meet  the  next  invitation  of  his 
friend  with  an  evasive  excuse.  (So  far  as  the  "happy 
marriage  of  to-day"  is  concerned,  I  am  fully  con- 
vinced that  the  vaunted  constancy  in  it  is  due  far 
more  to  the  fact  that  outsiders  respect  the  "label" 
than  to  the  will  or  inclination  of  the  husband  and 
wife.  It  is  an  easy  matter  for  a  woman  to  be  true 
to  her  husband  or  mate  when  no  other  man  dares 
or  cares  to  approach  her.) 

But  what  do  all  these  safeguards  mean?  As  it 
is  utterly  impossible  to  draw  any  dividing  line  be- 
tween the  sensual  and  the  spiritual  in  love,  they 
mean  that  men  and  women  constantly  fortify  and 
harden  themselves  against  the  grandest,  the  nob- 
lest, the  most  beautiful  sentiments  of  the  heart, 
while  coldness  and  indifference  are  consistently 
encouraged  and  free  scope  is  given  to  hatred  and 
contempt.  And  it  further  means,  that,  if  these  free 
unions  are  not  merely  vulgar  concubinages,  in 
which,  as  the  saying  is.  "the  heart  plays  no  part," 
they  are  imitations  of  Christian  marriage,  but  lack 
the  safety  and  security,  the  mutual  confidence, 
arising  from  the  firm  resolution  on  both  sides  to 
"take  each  other  for  life,"  which,  under  favorable 
conditions,  is  very  conducive  to  constancy  in  "quiet 
friendship."  • 

Let  us  now  suppose  that  the  three  persons  just 
mentioned  had  all  freed  themselves  from  the  pre- 


—  160  — 

valent  superstitions  in  regard  to  love  and  sex- 
relations,  and  try  to  understand  in  what  manner 
this  would  change  the  conditions  and  results.  In 
the  first  place,  neither  the  fact  that  Mr.  A.  and  Mrs. 
B.  fell  in  love  with  each  other,  nor  that  they  estab- 
lished a  joint  home  and  household  and  entered  into 
family  relations,  nor  even  the  fact  that  they  joined 
all  their  material  interests,  will  then  bind  in  any 
way  their  sexual  freedom  or  their  freedom  in  love 
in  general.  The  one  important  guarantee  which 
firmly  establishes  and  secures  this  love  liberty,  is 
the  fact  that  every  free  man  and  woman  will  al- 
ways have  at  least  one  room  as  all  his  or  her  own, 
and  that  they  will  never  think  of  giving  up  this 
right  for  any  consideration.  Hardly  anything 
would  appear  more  disgusting  and  degrading  to  a 
free  woman  than  the  idea  of  having  a  man  forced 
by  custom  to  sleep  with  her.  If  necessary  she  will 
gladly  sacrifice  the  parlor  or  even  the  sitting-room 
for  a  room  of  her  own,  and  even  the  most  passion- 
ate love  will  not  change  her  mind  in  this  after  she 
has  once  perceived  the  importance  of  the  question. 
Furthermore,  she  will  demand  and  frequently  use 
the  right  to  receive  in  this,  her  private  apartment, 
any  visitor  of  the  opposite  sex  with  whom  she 
wishes  to  be  alone. 

Let  us  now  try  to  imagine  a  situation,  which 
would  appear  extremely  dangerous  under  present 
conditions:  The  sitting-room  in  the  joint  home  of 
Mr.  A.  and  Mrs.  B.,  the  former  at  his  desk,  study- 
ing out  some  vexing  problem,  the  latter  engaged 
in  a  lively  conversation  Avith  the  guest,  Mr.  C.  The 


—  161  — 

talk  gradually  becomes  more  animated,  and  the 
t\vo  engaged  in  it  discover  some  chords  in  their 
natures  which  blend  in  beautiful  harmony,  thrill- 
ing their  hearts  with  delight  and  waking  the  desire 
to  enjoy  this  where  they  are  secure  from  the  intru- 
sion of  a  third  person.  Without  the  least  hesita- 
tion, as  a  matter  of  course,  the  woman  invites  the 
guest  to  accompany  her  to  her  room  or  private 
apartments.  When  there  they  are  securely  removed 
from  any  critical  supervision  or  control  by  any 
other  person  or  by  society  in  general,  and  are  ab- 
solutely free  to  enjoy  whatever  love  or  sympathy 
may  exist  between  them.  Whether  this  will  culmin- 
ate in  sexual  intercourse  or  not  will  probably  be  of 
far  less  importance  to  them  than  it  appeal's  to  the 
lovers  of  to-day,  and  it  certainly  will  not  concern 
the  outside  world.  As  to  Mr.  A.,  the  withdrawal  of 
the  two  will  have  no  further  significance  than  that 
they  do  not  wish  to  have  their  talk  interfere  with 
his  thoughts  or  that  they  do  not  desire  to  be  dis- 
turbed by  him.  It  appears  to  him  as  the  natural 
and  commendable  enjoyment  of  personal  liberty, 
which  he  grants  to  all  others  as  he  unreservedly 
claims  it  for  himself,  which  both  he  and  Mrs.  B. 
make  use  of  quite  frequently,  which  probably  only 
yesterday  led  to  a  private  interview  of  his  partner 
with  another  man  having  no  other  purpose  than  a 
mere  business-talk.  But  we  might  suppose  a  more 
critical  position,  we  might  imagine  that  Mr.  A.  had 
been  an  interested  participant  in  the  conversation, 
that  lie  had  plainly  noticed  that  the  desire  for  a 
private  interview  was  caused  by  a  passionate  love 


-  162  - 

arising  between  Mrs.  A.  and  Mr.  C.,  but  even  this 
would  not  at  all  be  disagreeable  to  him.  He  may 
have  a  very  high  opinion  of  himself,  he  may  con- 
sider himself  as  good  a  man  as  there  is  in  this 
world,  but,  being  a  free  man  he  cannot  be  such  a 
vain  fool  as  to  imagine  that  he  possesses  all  those 
qualities  to  perfection  which  might  be  warmly  ap- 
preciated by  any  particular  woman  of  fair  intelli- 
gence. If  he  is  not  altogether  without  common 
sense,  he  will  know  that  there  probably  are  thou- 
sands of  men  in  this  world  who  are  far  superior  to 
him  in  some  one  or  other  quality,  which  would  be 
a  beautiful  complement  of  some  particular  element 
of  Mrs.  B.'s  nature,  and  if  his  alleged  love  for  her 
is  not  a  mere  sham  he  will  desire  to  have  her  enjoy 
the  fullest  and  most  perfect  life  as  it  is  possible 
only  by  means  of  intimate  social  intercourse  with 
many  congenial  beings.  To  say  that  that  would 
endanger  her  love  for  him  would  be  equivalent  to 
admitting  that  he  had  no  value  whatever  for  her. 
In  order  to  test  the  most  critical  situation 
imaginable,  ~\ve  Avill  now  suppose  that  both  men 
had  at  the  same  moment  an  equally  strong  wish 
for  an  ''ideal  enjoyment  of  love''  with  Mrs.  B.,  or, 
to  make  it  stronger  still,  passionately  desired  at 
the  same  moment  sexual  intercourse  with  her. 
(Every  reader,  who  has  fully  understood  the  the- 
ory, will  readily  perceive  that  such  a  position 
would  be  an  absurdity,  almost  an  impossibility, 
where  the  three  persons  are  really  "free,"  but  in 
order  to  leave  no  doubt,  it  is  best  to  reckon  with 
the  extreme  of  possibility.)  This  is  a  critical  sit- 


—  163  - 

nation  indeed  and  of  course  means  fight.  Zool- 
ogists inform  us  that  they  have  observed  many 
cases  in  the  animal  kingdom,  where  the  female 
looks  on  with  serene  complaisance  while  two  males 
are  engaged  in  a  bloody  fight  for  her  possession 
and  graciously  allows  the  proud  victor  to  be  her 
mate.  To  the  lioness  this  11133'  appear  the  most 
practical  method  of  getting  the  "best,"  but  I  am 
perfectly  confident  that  the  highest  class  of  female 
beings  will  not  demand  such  a  bloody  battle  to 
measure  values.  Where  no  "possession"  can  pos- 
sibly last  any  longer  than  a  few  hours,  jealousy 
will  mean  no  more  than  a  constant  striving  to 
show  value,  and  intelligent  beings  will  not  have  to 
wound  or  kill  to  prove  physical  strength  and  skill, 
mental  ability,  or  moral  value.  In  conclusion,  1 
must  remark  that  what  I  have  said  about  the 
jealousy  of  the  youth  applies  equally  well  to  this 
case.  If  there  is  any  difference  it  is  decidedly  in 
favor  of  the  latter,  because  here  the  parties  can 
be  more  confident  that  economic  slavery  will  not 
necessitate  such  distances  in  their  abodes  as  to 
materially  decrease  their  chances  for  the  future. 

An  opponent  says:  "Suppose,  however,  that 
the  natural  inclinations  of  the  woman  should  be 
decidedly  monogamous?" 

Would  this  mean  that  there  is  but  one  man  in 
the  world  who  could  arouse  her  sexual  desire?  If 
so,  then  I  would  ask  :  How  can  a  woman  know  this 
before  she  has  seen  all  men  and  been  wooed  by  all? 
Or  does  it  mean  that  for  a  long  time  (say  ten  years 
after  maturity)  it  has  happened,  that  but  one  man 


—  164  — 

has  been  able  to  win  her  for  sexual  intercourse,  and 
that  consequently  she  gives  up  all  hopes  of  ever 
being  able  to  love  any  other  man  sexually?  I  will 
not  dispute  the  possibility  of  such  a  case,  but  if  it 
should  happen  we  will  stand  a  very  poor  chance  of 
being  informed  of  it,  for  no  free  woman  will  ever 
think  of  bragging  about  it  or  making  it  publicly 
known,  for  the  simple  reason  that  to  publish  the 
fact  would  mean  either  to  expose  a  deplorable 
weakness  in  herself  or  to  offer  an  insult  to  all 
men  but  one,  which  would  make  her  social  inter- 
course extremely  unpleasant.  And  if  the  supposi- 
tion should  imply  still  more,  i.  e.,  that  a  free 
woman  might  permanently  consider  one  man  her 
"God"  or  the  ideal  man,  so  that  she  could  have  no 
love  for  any  other  man  and  would  have  no  love- 
desire  except  to  become  the  "Goddess''  of  one  man, 
then  I  would  say  that,  in  such  a  case,  we  should 
have  sincere  pity  for  the  woman  with  the  deranged 
mind,  but  would  watch  her  rather  closely  to  see 
whether  her  condition  might  not  become  danger- 
ous to  the  lives  of  her  associates. 

In  a  free  society  a  woman  is  at  perfect  liberty, 
of  course,  to  have  sexual  intercourse  with  only  one 
man,  with  a  thousand  different  ones,  or  with  none 
at  all,  but  if  monogamy  is  her  ideal  she  is  no  free 
woman,  and  if  she  is  foolish  enough  to  make  her 
ideal  and  her  choice  publicly  known,  that  will  prove 
to  be  a  disastrous  "label,"  which  will  render  the  free 
social  intercourse  almost  valueless  to  her. 

The  real  fact  is,  that  the  terms  "monogamic," 
"polygamic,"or"polyandric"  are  never  applicable 


—  165  — 

to  any  free  man  or  woman.  The  definite  meaning 
of  these  expressions  refers  exclusively  to  the  ques- 
tion as  to  how  many  human  beings  a  person  may 
or  desires  to  possess  for  the  purpose  of  satisfying 
his  sexual  impulse,  to  which  a  free  individual  can 
give  no  other  answer  than,  None  whatever. 

The  present  unnatural  conditions  have  of  course 
caused  many  abnormalities  in  the  physical  consti- 
tutions of  human  beings.  Some,  although  fairly 
healthy  otherwise,  may  have  but  very  little  or  even 
no  sexual  desire.  Furthermore,  ill-health  makes 
many  men  and  women  for  a  long  time  unfit  for 
the  enjoyment  of  sexual  pleasures.  I  trust  that 
everv  intelligent  reader  will  readily  see  by  this 

t>  t-  */ 

time  the  immense  advantages  which  a  free  society 
offers  to  such  persons.  They  will  have  unlimited 
occasion  to  enjoy  all  the  delights  of  love  (which 
are  so  extremely  varied  and  manifold)  to  the  full 
extent  of  their  capacity  without  ever  being  obliged 
to  give  more  than  they  find  pleasure  in  giving, 
while  under  existing  conditions  they  are  either 
barred  from  all  real  enjoyment  of  love  with  the 
opposite  sex  or  are  forced  to  exceedingly  harmful 
prostitution  for  the  sake  of  a  valued  "relation." 

I  wish  to  have  it  understood  that,  when  I  refer 
to  the  enjoyments  of  these  persons,  I  do  not  by 
any  means  think  only  of  the  "merely  spiritual" 
pleasures.  Many  a  man  and  many  a  woman  no- 
tices a  particularly  agreeable  sensation  caused  by 
the  physical  proximity  of  a  sympathetic  person  of 
the  opposite  sex,  even  when  he  or  she  has  not  the 
least  inclination  for  sexual  intercourse,  or  when 


—  166  — 

disease  makes  such  an  impossibility.  As  stated  be- 
fore, the  influence  of  our  sex-nature  is  not  restricted 
to  the  time  of  pressing  desire  for  the  sex-act. 

In  my  estimation,  nothing  could  show  more 
plainly  the  absurd  inconsistency  and  the  perni- 
cious influence  of  the  superstitious  love-ideal  than 
the  cases  of  chronic  ill-health  of  the  man  or  the 
woman  in  a  monogamic  relation.  I  will  try  to  illus- 
trate this  by  a  story  from  real  life :  A  man  and  a 
woman,  both  young,  healthy,  and  vigorous  are 
drawn  together  by  mutual  sensual  sympathy  and 
spiritual  love.  They  marry,  enjoy  sexual  pleas- 
ures to  their  heart's  content  and  are  blessed  with 
healthy  children.  After  several  years  have  passed 
the  woman  is  taken  ill  and  loses  all  desire  for  sex- 
ual intercourse.  Her  husband  still  needs  it,  hence 
she  tortures  herself  for  some  time  with  quiet  sub- 
mission in.  spite  of  her  revolting  feelings.  It  is  a 
sad  and  dreary  "enjoyment,"  which  blurs  the  bliss- 
ful memories  of  former  beautiful  love-idyls  with 
sickening  disgust.  Of  course  such  unnatural  ac- 
tions aggravate  her  ailment  and  after  a  while  she 
is  obliged  to  stop  all  further  sexual  indulgence. 
The  strong  and  robust  man,  who  for  years  has 
been  accustomed  to  regular  sexual  satisfaction,  is 
suddenly  forced  to  continence.  The  natural  im- 
pulse torments  him,  but  he  loves  his  faithful  life- 
companion  and  therefore  he  exerts  himself  to  the 
utmost  to  suppress  his  feelings.  He  does  not  quite 
succeed  in  this,  which  causes  moodiness  and  nerv- 
ous irritation.  Although  he  cannot  quite  control 
his  thought,  yet  he  can  and  will  control  his  actions 


—  167  — 

and  he  remains  a  true  friend  and  protector.  But  he 
cannot  ah\ays  stay  with  her;  he  must  go  out  into 
the  world  to  earn  a  living,  and  there  he  meets  a 
pretty  young  woman,  full  of  life  and  vigor,  who 
casts  at  him  a  look  of  passionate  longing,  which 
promptly  enflames  his  scarcely  suppressed  sensa- 
tions. Seriously  alarmed,  he  turns  away  —  a  firm 
resolve,  and  he  goes  back  to  ''duty!"  Energetic 
self-control,  hard  labor,  and  serious  duties  may 
enable  him  to  banish  the  "dangerous"  thoughts 
from  his  mind  in  the  day-time,  but  at  night  a  vivid 
dream  brings  back  in  supernatural  glory  the  pic- 
ture of  the  enticing  siren.  Unforeseen  accidents,  per- 
haps also  the  desire  of  the  woman,  cause  several 
further  meetings  at  critical  moments  and  in  "dan- 
gerous" situations.  Finally,  suppressed,  violated 
nature  has  its  revenge:  to  the  troubled  mind  of 
the  unhappy  man  everything  in  the  world  now 
aj) pears  indifferent  except  the  possession  of  that 
woman,  and  quite  often  his  wife  seems  to  him  a 
miserable,  useless  being,  who  is  only  a  burden  to 
himself  and  others.  Persistently  the  thought  will 
come  back  to  him — If  she  were  but  dead,  then  the 
thought  of  the  other  would  not  be  a  sin!  In  a 
moment  of  passionate  excitement  this  desire  be- 
comes so  strong  that  it  forces  him  to  assist  the 
wasting  disease"  in  completing  more  rapidly  its 
work  of  destruction  !  Ah,  horrible,  beastly  deed,  to 
murder  his  own  wife!  Yes,  horrible  indeed,  but  the 
most  horrible  feature  of  it  is  that  it  was  caused 
not  by  uncontrollable  hatred,  but  by  love!  Fur- 
thermore, \ve  must  perceive  that  those  men  whom 


—  168  — 

you  call  the  noblest  are  in  the  greatest  danger  of 
faltering  in  such  a  crisis.  The  weak  coward  and 
the  cold  and  practical  reckoner  will  not  enter  into 
such  a  struggle;  their  natural  impulse  will  be  sub- 
dued sufficiently  at  all  times  by  so-called  self-abuse 
to  enable  them  to  retain  the  prescribed  cool  in- 
difference towards  the  most  "dangerous"  of  all 
women,  while  the  wily  hypocrite  will  satisfy  his 
desire  in  "clandestine  relations"  and  with  solemn 
oaths  assure  his  anxious  wife  of  his  undying  ex- 
clusive love ! 

Free-Lovers  can  justly  claim  that  in  their  free 
unions  such  a  deed  from  such  a  motive  would  be 
impossible,  but  they  cannot  claim  that  under  like 
circumstances  extreme  misery  would  not  be  caused 
—  by  love!  Consistency  in  the  theory  would  of 
course  justify  the  man  in  promptly  severing  his 
relation  with  the  sick  woman,  saying  good-bye  as 
a  friend,  hiring  a  nurse  if  he  could  afford  it,  and 
"living  with"  the  wroman  to  whom  his  love  has 
changed.  One  would  think  that  in  such  a  case  the 
man,  even  if  he  were  ever  so  much  of  an  exclusive- 
love-enthusiast,  would  realize  for  once,  that  his 
ideal  is  a  horrible  humbug,  that  a  man  can  love 
two  women  truly  and  fervently.  But,  alas!  that 
exclusive  superstition  seems  to  be  too  thoroughly 
instilled  into  them,  and  so  we  observe  the  strange 
phenomenon,  that,  instead  of  accepting  plain  facts, 
they  generally  resort  to  shallow  sophistries  for  the 
sake  of  their  cherished  fetich.  Some  declare,  "One 
love  only  is  the  true  love,  while  the  other  is  false." 
(These  generally  say,  You  must  remain  with 


—  169  — 

woman  Xo.  1.)  Others  philosophize  thus-  The  feel- 
ing towards  one  of  the  women  is  "conjugal  love,'' 
while  the  sympathy  for  the  other  is  merely  friend- 
ship. (These  say,  Go  to  woman  Xo.  2.)  In  most 
cases,  of  course,  theory  will  not  be  very  apt  to 
settle  the  question  who  shall  have  the  man,  but, 
no  matter  how  it  is  decided,  unhappiness  is  sure 
to  follow,  not  only  for  one  but  for  all  parties  in- 
terested, and  certainly  neither  decision  could  be 
termed  a  satisfactory  solution. 

Free  yourselves  from  superstition  and  you  will 
find  that  all  these  awful  difficulties  are  mere  ghosts 
and  phantoms  which  still  scare  poor  mortals  to 
death.  They  exist  only  in  the  imagination.  In  sim- 
ilar cases  in  a  free  society  there  positively  would 
be  no  difficulty  to  solve.  Even  there  meanness  and 
hatred  might  still  cause  misery  and  unhappiness, 
but  love — never.  There  living  together,  if  it  had 
any  meaning  whatever,  would  simply  imply  a  prac- 
tical economic  arrangement  for  a  joint  home  and 
household,  and  whether  this  excluded  all  but  two 
or  included  the  entire  society  would  make  no  differ- 
ence whatever  in  their  freedom  to  love.  And  as  to 
the  comradeship-contracts,  which  mean  constant 
and  true  friendship,  even  the  moralists  of  to-day 
do  not  hold  that  they  must  necessarily  be  exclu- 
sive. Just  imagine  what  a  fine  opinion  future  gen- 
erations will  have  of  the  nineteenth  century  people 
who  in  their  foolish  superstition  believed  that  one 
must ''live  with''  a  certain  person  in  order  to  enjoy 
a  particular  kind  of  love,  which  they  distinguished 
from  other  love  by  the  "scientific"  term  "conjugal !" 


-170  - 

It  is  impossible,  of  course,  to  imagine  any  group 
of  free  men  and  women  where  the  circumstances 
would  be  in  any  way  analogous  to  those  I  have 
just  described.  Suppose  that  one  of  two  life-com- 
panions who  had  joined  their  interests  in  a  home 
and  family — say,  for  instance,  the  woman  —  be- 
comes an  invalid  for  a  long  time  or  for  life.  Then 
she  would  have  a  chance  to  appreciate  and  enjoy, 
more  fully  and  profoundly  than  ever  before,  the 
great  advantages  of  a  comradeship-contract.  His 
sense  of  honor,  his  regard  for  the  appreciation  and 
respect  of  all  the  men  and  women  with  whom  he 
associates,  would  force  her  partner  to  be  true  to 
his  comradeship-contract,  and  no ''passion"  would 
interfere.  But  no  such  consideration  would*  be  ne- 
cessary for  the  security  of  the  woman.  It  is  love, 
fervent  love,  which  is  increased  rather  than  dim- 
inished by  any  misfortune  of  the  beloved,  that  will 
irresistibly  impel  her  partner  to  remain  a  true 
friend  under  all  circumstances.  In  regard  to  those 
persons  to  whom  love  means  no  more  than  the  de- 
sire for  sexual  intercourse,  I  will  say  that  there  is 
not  the  slightest  danger  that  they  will  ever  be- 
chosen  for  such  a  comradeship-contract  or  care  to 
enter  into  such. 

The  great  value  and  beauty  of  friendship  be- 
tween man  and  woman  will  become  fully  apparent 
after  we  cease  to  ask  that  it  compete,  in  the  choice 
of  a  "mate,"  with  the  strong  sexual  impulse  or 
(as  it  is  so  often  the  case  in  present  society)  with. 
morbid  sensuality,  the  "revenge  of  insulted  nat- 
ure." 


—  171  — 

If  during;  the  time  of  the  woman's  ailing  a  pas- 
sionate love  should  arise  between  her  partner  and 
another  woman,  this  would  mean  that  the  man 
has  most  effective  sympathy  and  assistance  in  per- 
forming his  duties  as  a  comrade  towards  one  be- 
loved, who  may  need  tender  care  and  watchful 
attendance.  If  some  reader  should  still  vaguely 
dread  that  the  sick  woman  might  be  furiously  jeal- 
ous when  she  had  reason  to  surmise  that  the  two 
loving  attendants  occasionally  had  sexual  inter- 
course with  each  other,  then  I  would  beg  him  or 
her  to  at  least  come  to  a  clear  understanding  of 
what  this  would  mean.  It  would  mean  that,  al- 
though she  claims  to  love  the  man,  she  begrudges 
him  a  pleasure  for  which  she  has  no  desire  herself. 
To  the  free  woman  this  would  appear  as  the  incar- 
nation of  meanness,  for  which  no  excuse  could  be 
found  other  than  temporary  mental  derangement 
or — idiotic  superstition!  "Thy  joy  is  my  joy,  thy 
woe  is  my  woe;"  that  certainly  expresses  a  beauti- 
ful sentiment,  but  it  would  be  horribly  parodied  if 
interpreted  thus:  "Thou  shalt  not  enjoy  when  I 
cannot  enjoy:"  or,  worse  still,  "Thou  must  enjoy 
when  I  wish  to  enjoy!" 

I  trust  that  you,  my  reader,  have  by  this  time 
fully  realized  the  value  and  import  of  the  theory, 
that  you  have  understood  what  it  means  to  be  free 
in  love  and  to  reject  the  old  idea  of  possessing  one 
human  being  of  the  opposite  sex  as  your  love- 
object.  If  you  should  still  have  an  inward  instinct- 
ive feeling  which  seems  to  say,  ''Impossible!",  let 
me  assure  you  that  experience  has  proved  that  it 


—  172  - 

is  possible,  ves,  that  it  is  far  from  difficult  for  intel- 
ligent beings.  Think  twice  before  yon  speak  and 
act,  study  again  the  arguments  in  this  book,  and 
if  your  reason  tells  you  that  they  contain  nothing 
but  plain  common  sense  and  the  logical  conclu- 
sions drawn  from  the  experiences  of  human  society, 
then  do  not  offer  such  a  cowardly  excuse  as  this, 
"Ah,  but  we  cannot  overcome  our  weaknesses  by 
reason."  If  that  could  not  be  done  there  would 
have  been  no  intellectual  progress  in  the  world. 
The  man  who  formerly  believed  in  ghosts  and  who 
has  now  been  enlightened  upon  the  subject  will  also 
perceive  that  a  great  deal  of  the  old  feeling  of  dread 
still  remains.  But  if  he  has  energy  and  moral  cour- 
age he  will  again  go  over  all  the  arguments  of 
reason,  satisfy  himself  that  there  can  be  no  ghost, 
and  then  march  into  the  haunted  place  when  the 
clock  strikes  twelve.  In  his  first  experiment  he 
may  still  require  a  great  deal  of  energetic  self-con- 
trol to  subdue  the  nervous  excitement,  it  may  ap- 
pear to  him  as  quite  a  bold  deed,  but  after  a  few 
repetitions  he  will  laugh  at  his  childish  fears. 

Do  not  say  "Impossible!"  when  there  are  no 
other  obstacles  in  the  way  than  the  feelings  born 
of  rank  superstition ! 


XV. 
The  Ideal  Society. 


TX  my  German  book,  I  devoted  much  more  space 
than  1  have  here  to  the  description  of  that  union 
of  a  free  man  and  woman  which,  so  far  as  outward 
appearance  is  concerned,  comes  nearest  to  the  con- 
ventional marriage  of  to-day.  I  wrote  far  more 
enthusiastically  of  the  advantages  of  such  a  union, 
and  proposed  that  the  family  contract  be  called 
the  "marriage  of  the  free,"  and  that  even  the  terms 
husband  and  wife  be  retained  for  the  partners. 

These  were  serious  mistakes  on  my  part,  which 
caused  a  great  deal  of  confusion  in  the  minds  of 
my  readers  as  to  the  real  scope  of  my  theory.  They 
were  probably  the  main  cause  of  the  almost  gen- 
eral misunderstanding  of  which  I  have  complained. 

As  to  the  terminology,  I  must  admit  that  my 
experience  since  the  publication  of  the  German 
treatise  has  completely  reversed  my  opinion.  A 
year  ago  I  thought :  '-What  is  there  in  a  name?  If 
we  can  gain  any  advantage  thereby,  be  it  but  to 
facilitate  our  necessary  intercourse  with  the  philis- 
tines,  we  will  retain  the  old  terms  and  give  them 
new  meanings."  Hence,  I  proposed  even  to  the  new 
beginners  that  they  accept  the  terms  husband  and 


—  174  - 

wife,  in  the  family-relation.  I  argued  somewhat  like 
this :  There  are  so  many  varied  conceptions  of  the 
word  marriage  in  the  civilized  world,  almost  every 
different  creed  giving-  it  a  peculiar  meaning,  why 
should  we  not  accept  the  word  to  describe  the 
union  of  a  man  and  a  woman,  and  apply  and 
understand  it  in  such  a  manner  as  to  conform  to 
our  moral  convictions?  I  forgot,  however,  that, 
although  there  is  apparently  a  vast  difference  in 
the  conception,  the  word  does  mean  now  in  each 
and  every  case  sexual  possession,  and  the  differ- 
ence refers  only  to  the  question  of  how  easily  one 
can  attain  and  get  rid  of  such  a  possession,  and 
how  far  the  rights  and  privileges  of  ownership  ex- 
tend. 

"Married,"  "husband,"  "wife" — these  will  al- 
ways prove  to  be  exceedingly  annoying  and  per- 
fectly useless  "labels"  for  free  men  and  women,  and 
to  wilfully  place  them  upon  ourselves  is  as  absurd 
as  to  falsely  mark  a  box  "dynamite!",  when  Ave 
have  no  desire  to  scare  off  anybody.  Therefore,  I 
now  advise  all  '-new  beginners"  to  choose  almost 
any  other  term  than  any  of  the  above.  Asa  gen- 
eral description  of  those  we  love,  "friend  '  appears 
to  me  as  the  best  and  worthiest,  it  being  sullied 
and  degraded  less  than  any  other  by  a  false  moral- 
ity; for  the  person  with  whom  you  associate  your 
economic  interests,  the  term  "partner"  is  very  ap- 
propriate, as  it  plainly  indicates  equality  of  rights 
and  definitely  stipulated  terms  in  regard  to  the 
respective  interests  and  the  mutual  obligations 
(which,  under  present  conditions,  is  of  great  im- 


—  175  — 

portance,  especially  for  women);  —  and  if  ye  free 
women  wish  to  have  a  special  title  for  the  father 
of  your  child,  invent  a  new  one,  but  do  not  say 
"husband/'  It  can  hardly  be  expected  that  a  mail 
and  woman  who  were  legally  married  before  they 
became  "free,"  will  be  anxious  to  go  through  that 
disgusting  farce,  divorce,  (which  is  generally  either 
quite  difficult  or  quite  expensive)  simply  to  get  rid 
of  the  obnoxious  label,  but  they  can  gradually 
erase  it  by  guarding  against  applying  the  obnoxi- 
ous terms  to  themselves,  and  by  objecting,  when- 
ever it  appears  expedient,  to  the  use  of  the  terms 
by  others  in  addressing  them  or  speaking  of  them. 
The  inexpediency  and  danger  of  the  attempt 
to  give  an  entirely  new  meaning  to  old  words  was 
brought  home  to  me  in  a  drastic  and  rather  humili- 
ating manner  by  an  incident  of  last  year.  A  learned 
gentleman,  whom  I  must  consider  an  intelligent 
man  and  a  careful  reader,  was  asked  by  an  ac- 
quaintance to  give  him  an  idea  of  what  my  theory 
means.  After  some  hesitation  he  said :  "Well,  it 
means  that  every  husband  should  willingly  and 
gladly  allow  his  wife  to  have  sexual  intercourse 
with  other  men !"  I  was  indignant,  of  course,  when 
the  story  was  reported  to  me,  but  I  had  to  admit 
that  it  would  be  no  easy  matter  to  give  the  lie  to 
this  man.  Intentionally  or  unintentionally,  he  used 
the  terms,  husband  and  wife,  without  explaining 
that  where  I  use  them  in  speaking  of  the  free  so- 
ciety they  have  an  entirely  different  meaning  from 
that  usually  attaching  to  them.  Hence  they  natur- 
ally and  on  their  face  suggest  the  idea  of  sexual 


—  176  — 

possession.  Now,  where  this  is  absolute  exclusive 
mutual  possession,  as  in  a  pure  monogamic  mar- 
riage, we  can  well  imagine  it  to  be  associated  with 
true,  fervent  love,  while  in  the  case  of  a  voluntary 
sharing  of  the  love-object  with  another  or  others 
we  promptly  become  doubtful  and  ascribe  this  to 
indifference,  and  when  it  comes  to  occasionally 
loaning  your  possession  to  others,  or,  worse  still, 
selling  it  or  giving  it  away,  love  is  out  of  the  ques- 
tion, and  it  becomes  simply  disgusting  to  the  un- 
free  as  well  as  to  the  free. 

Suppose,  however,  that  I  had  not  given  this 
man  the  slightest  justification  for  using  the  terms 
in  such  a  connection.  His  explanation  Avould  then 
read  as  follows:  "The  free  man  should  willingly 
and  gladly  allow  the  free  woman,  with  whom  he 
has  entered  into  a  family-contract,  to  have  sexual 
intercourse  with  others  than  himself."  I  do  not 
think  that  my  worthy  critic  would  have  cared  to 
make  a  fool  of  himself  by  such  a  statement.  How 
ludicrously  silly  it  would  be  to  speak  of  "allowing" 
where  there  is  positively  nothing  to  allow,  where 
there  cannot  be  the  slightest  reason  for  asking  per- 
mission from  any  one!  Then  the  man  could  have 
given  no  other  answer  than  this,  if  he  thought  only 
of  the  sexual  relations :  "It  means,  No  sexual  "liv- 
ing together,"  no  sexual  contract,  neither  for  a 
week  nor  for  life,  neither  for  love  nor  money.  No 
sexual  "belonging  together"  to  extend  beyond  the 
time  in  which  the  lovers  naturally  belong  together 
(exclusively,  of  course),  which  cannot  possibly  last 
any  longer  than  a  few  hours !" 


-  177  - 

In  regard  to  my  enthusiasm  for  home  and  fam- 
ily. I  must  state  that  I  have  not  changed  my  mind. 
Nevertheless,  I  have  to  concede  that  the  expression 
of  it  without  further  comment  was  a  serious  mis- 
take in  tactics,  as  the  resulting  misunderstanding 
has  plainly  proved.  An  intelligent  critic  writes  to 
me  somewhat  like  this :  "What  a  strange  inconsist- 
ency !  you  bitterly  oppose  the  monogamic  sex-rela- 
tion and  at  the  same  time  speak  with  glowing  en- 
thusiasm of  the  monogamic  family!  Do  you  not 
perceive  that  the  latter  is  also  but  an  outgrowth 
of  superstition?  Can  you  not  conceive  a  higher 
ideal  for  the  comradeship  of  human  beings  than 
the  Christian  family?" 

To  avoid  further  misunderstanding,  I  must 
state  that  it  was  not  the  purpose  of  my  German 
book  and  that  neither  is  it  the  object  of  this  treatise, 
to  illustrate  an  ideal  living  together  in  an  ideal  so- 
ciety or  a  beautiful  future  for  our  grand-children, 
but  to  show  the  happiest  condition  which  is  pos- 
sible at  present;  to  investigate  that  we  may  de- 
termine how  we  shall  act  now! — therefore,  I  had  to 
reckon  with  existing  circumstances.  There  can  be 
no  question  that  in  the  present  condition  of  human 
society  the  joint  home  and  household,  the  com- 
radeship-contract, and  the  family-relation  with  one 
person  of  the  opposite  sex  offer  a  great  advantage, 
yes.  even  a  net  increase  in  personal  liberty,  to  many, 
and  to  ask  that  they  should  be  sacrificed  for  the 
sake  of  a  principle  must  always  prove  fatal  to  the 
cause. 

It  may  be  expedient,  however,  to  always  keep 


—  178  — 

In  view  an  ideal  which  we  desire  to  reach,  in  order 
to  be  sure  that  our  steps  are  taken  in  the  right 
direction.  My  ideal  is :  Liberte,  Fraternite,  E^-ilitr 
— "The  Brotherhood  of  Man"  —  "Human  society 
one  great  family" — but  if  you  should  claim  that 
therefore  I  must  consider  it  my  duty  to  greet  every 
man  as  my  brother,  every  woman  as  my  sister. 
either  in  the  world  at  large  or  in  a  separated  so- 
ciety, that  to  me  would  appear  as  absurd  as  the 
command  irom  above:  "Love  thy  neighbor  as  thy- 
self!" 

I  could  not  imagine  a  beautiful  human  society 
without  a  general  love  and  sympathy  between  all 
its  members,  but  I  know  that  this  condition  can 
never  be  reached  by  any  practical  agreement,  "sense 
of  duty,"  sacrifice  for  principle,  nor  by  the  most 
complete  economic  communism.  Remove,  however, 
the  icy  barriers  which  superstition  has  erected  and 
we  will  constantly  get  nearer  to  the  ideal,  universal 
love  for  humankind— we  will  soon  have  a  high  de- 
gree of  economic  communism,  resulting,  not  from 
enslaving  dogmas  or  laws,  but  from  thf  spontane- 
ous desire  of  free  individuals. 

So  long  as  "the  bosom  of  humanity  is  such  a 
cold  place  to  rest  upon"  (as  Mrs.  Lillie  D.  White 
puts  it),  many  men  and  women  will  long  for  a 
home,  a  family  of  their  own,  as  "a  safe  refuge  and 
peaceful  resting  place  from  the  cold  and  indifferent 
world,"  and  it  is  of  the  utmost  importance  to  show 
them  that  they  can  have  this  security  and  still  re- 
tain their  freedom  in  love.  The  free  and  intimate 
social  intercourse  resulting  from  sex  freedom  will 


-  179  - 

soon  bring  then:  all  nearer  to  each  other,  the  in- 
difference and  coldness  will  give  way  to  a  friendly 
interest  in  the  welfare  of  the  neighbor,  gradually 
the  feeling  of  mutual  confidence  and  security  will 
increase  until  finally  they  perceive  that  it  is  no 
longer  necessary  to  enter  into  a  binding  contract 
with  one  human  being  in  order  to  secure  fervent 
sympathy  with  all  your  joys  and  sorrows  and  will- 
ing aid  in  need  and  distress — that  the  '; bosom  of 
humanity"  has  become  a  safer  and  better  resting- 
place  than  any  one  man  or  woman  can  guarantee. 
As  this  conviction  grows  stronger  the  originally 
small  and  rigid  boundary  lines  of  the  small  family 
circle  will  gradually  expand  and  finally  embrace 
the  entire  human  society. 

In  other  words — In  a  free  society  the  so-called 
monogamic  family  relation  (which  at  present  must 
appear  necessary)  will  gradually  disappear  as  it 
lessens  in  value.  And  every  such  diminution  will 
indicate  that  we  have  come  nearer  to  the  ideal 
society,  which  I  would  thus  describe: 

A  society  where  every  child  is  inspired  by  its 
educators  with  a  fervent  appreciation  of  the  value 
which  every  member  of  the  large  human  family  has 
for  the  whole  as  well  as  for  each  individual — where 
every  youth  and  maiden  entering  into  the  society 
of  free  and  responsible  individuals  will  be  buoyed 
by  the  hopeful  and  joyous  expectation  that,  by 
duly  showing  and  exercising  the  tenderest  and 
strongest  qualities  of  their  natures,  their  impetu- 
ous longing  will  readily  attract  the  reciprocal  feel- 
ing in  congenial  friends — where  the  life  of  every  man 


—  180  — 

and  woman  is  jeweled  with  many  "ideal  enjoyments 
of  love," in  which  all  the  world  is  forgotten  for  one 
of  its  inhabitants — and,  last  but  not  least,  where 
his  material  welfare  is  ever  remembered,  where  pro- 
found interest  in  his  weal  and  woe  and  prompt  help 
in  need  is  permanently  secured  for  every  human  be- 
ing; by  a  comradeship-contract  with  the  entire  so- 
ciety, a  contract  which  is  absolutely  voluntary, 
but  which  is  enforced  more  surely  than  by  the 
most  stringent  laws,  by  that  sentiment  which  en- 
ables every  member  to  say  with  truthful  fervor  to 
all  humanity:  "Thy  joy  is  my  joy,  thy  woe  is  my 
woe.  Oh,  beautiful  world,  I  love  thee!" 


XVI. 

The  Number  of  Children  in  a  Free 
Society. 


C  OME  of  my  critics  have  expressed  the  fear  that 
absolute  sexual  freedom  would  result  in  a  large 
number  of  undesired  and  unprovided-for  children, 
and  for  the  following-  reasons : 

1.  Xo  preventive  check  being-  absolutely  safe. 

2.  Sensual  passion  often  causing  lovers  to  for- 
get all  about  the  preventives  or  to  use  them  care- 
lessly and  indifferently. 

I  claim  that  these  fears  are  perfectly  ground- 
less and  that  the.  reasons  stated  apply  only  to  the 
''secret  sins*'  of  conventional  society.  There  are 
several  good  preventive  checks  known  now,  which 
may  be  called  practically  safe,  the  use  of  which  is 
extremely  simple  and  unembarrassing,  and  these 
will  be  greatly  improved  in  a  very  short  time  in  a 
free  society.  Every  free  man  and  woman  will  be 
constantly  "prepared,"'  even  when  there  is  no 
thought  of  sexual  intercourse.  In  every  bed-room 
the  required  articles  will  belong  as  self-evidently  to 


—  182  — 

the  toilet  outfit  as  the  comb  and  brush.  Further- 
more, that  furious  passion  caused  by  morbid  sen- 
suality, which  is  liable  to  perfectly  derange  the 
mind,  will  not  appear  m  a  free  society.  For  these 
reasons  I  claim  that  chance-children  will  be  the  ex- 
tremely rare  exceptions. 

Others  again  are  of  the  opinion  that,  if  all 
women  were  free  individuals  and  had  a  chance  to 
fully  enjoy  sensual  love  at  any  time  without  therein- 
incurring  maternal  duties,  the  human  race  would 
soon  die  out.  Probably  nothing  better  could  hap- 
pen for  the  women  economically  than  that  all  men 
should  become  seriously  alarmed,  but  this  is  not 
very  liable  to  happen.  Women  have  given  us  too 
many  unmistakable  proofs  of  their  courage  in  this 
respect.  Think  of  the  many  cases  on  record  in 
which  women  voluntarily  suffered  painful,  yes,  even 
dangerous  operations  for  no  other  purpose  than 
to  be  able  to  conceive ! 

"But,"  the  critic  says,  "in  these  cases  they  did 
so  simply  to  please  a  man!" 

And  so  will  free  women  bear  children  in  many, 
perhaps  even  in  the  majority  of  cases,  simply  to 
please  a  man,  but  in  each  and  every  case  they  will 
ask  that  the  man  please  them  in  return. 

Women  will  do  a  great  deal  to  please  men  and 
men  will  do  a  great  deal  to  please  women,  especially 
when  they  love  without  possessing  ! 

Furthermore,  we  must  not  forget  that  the  "nat- 
ural inclination"  of  a  healthy  woman  decidedly 
favors  maternity. 

In  regard  to  the  so-called  population-question, 


—  183  — 

7.  e.,  whether  it  would  be  better  for  human  society 
for  population  to  diminish,  to  increase  gradually, 
or  to  remain  stationary,  I  will  say  that  this  prob- 
lem is  not  nearly  so  important  as  most  people 
seem  to  regard  it.  The  one  and  only  essential 
point  is  that  every  child  come  to  the  proper  place 
— be  well  conceived  and  well  cared  forever  after — 
and  I  claim  that  freedom  in  love  and  the  preventive 
check  will  bring-  about  this  condition. 

If  there  should  ever  be  reason  to  fear  that  the 
human  race  might  die  out,  this  would  result  in 
such  an  increased  valuation  and  appreciation  of 
the  child -bearing  woman  that  it  would  promptly 
bring  forth  many  thousands  of  volunteers  for  the 
noble  vocation  of  perpetuating  the  race. 

A  very  important  factor  which  should  be  con- 
sidered in  this  connection,  is  the  condition  of  the 
woman  during  the  pregnancy,  as  that  condition  is 
to-day  and  as  it  would  be  in  a  free  society.  While 
we  have  good  reason  to  expect  that  to  many  a 
woman  in  a  free  society  this  will  appear  a  partic- 
ularly pleasurable  time,  there  is  hardly  a  woman 
to-day  who  does  not  consider  pregnancy  a  humili- 
ating ordeal,  even  if  she  is  healthy  and  desires 
the  child.  Our  present-day  prospective  mother  is 
ashamed  of  herself !  She  tries  to  conceal  her  condi- 
tion as  long  as  she  can.  When  she  cannot  do 
so  any  more,  she  feels  obliged  to  withdraw  as 
much  as  possible  from  the  outside  world,  because 
the  changed  appearance  of  her  body  suggests  so 
strongly  the  immoral  thought  of  that  nasty,  im- 
pure act,  the  sex -association!  She  may  crave  a 


-  184- 

child  of  her  own,  she  may  be  glad  of  her  condition, 
but  she  cannot  speak  freely  and  openly  about  it 
with  joyful  pride  as  would  be  so  natural.  On  the 
contrary,  any  allusion  to  the  coming  baby  will 
bring  the  blush  of  shame  to  her  cheeks !  For  weeks 
and  months  she  is  excluded  from  many  pleasant  so- 
cial gatherings,  which  she  could  enjoy  as  much  as 
ever — and  if  in  some  cases  the  healthy  natural  feel- 
ing is  too  strong  to  submit  to  the  tyranny  of  cus- 
tom, her  own  husband  is  very  liable  to  forbid  her 
going  out,  because  she  looks  so  ugly!  Really,  it 
ought  to  bring  the  blush  of  shame  to  our  cheeks 
to  think  that  we  have  the  audacity  to  call  our- 
selves a  civilized  nation ! 

Nothing  can  show  more  plainly  the  horrible 
vulgarity  and  meanness  of  our  present  "morals" 
than  the  way  in  which  human  beings,  and  especially 
our  young  people,  look  upon  and  treat  pregnancy. 
Think  of  the  humiliating  position  of  the  pregnant 
mother  towards  her  son  of  eight  years.  By  some 
chance  the  boy  has  heard  of  a,n  expected  addition 
to  the  family.  He  asks  his  mother  about  it.  She 
is  embarrassed,  tries  to  evade  the  question,  and 
finally  tells  him  a  little  story  about  an  angel 
bringing  the  babies  from  heaven,  the  doctor  fish- 
ing them  out  of  the  pond,  or  the  like.  As  the  sub- 
ject does  not  interest  him  very  deeply,  the  boy  is 
perfectly  satisfied  with  any  definite  answer — until 
in  a  certain  twilight  hour  behind  the  wood-pile  a 
smart  street-urchin,  proud  of  his  wisdom,  initiates 
him  into  a  number  of  terrible  secrets :  Whence  the 
babies  come!  what  horribly  nasty  things  these 


—  185  — 

grown  folks  do  on  the  sly,  and  finally  what  his 
own  mother  must  have  done  lately ! 

The  latter  he  can  hardly  believe.  Reaching 
home,  he  promptly  questions  her  about  it,  and 
he  plainly  notices  that  she  is  shocked,  perplexed. 
She  blushes,  she  is  ashamed  of  herself!  —  Ah,  it  is 
true!  he  has  caught  her!  How  ridiculous  it  ap- 
pears to  him  when  she  finally  tells  him  that  a  little 
boy  ought  not  to  ask  such  questions  or  speak  or 
think  about  such  things.  With  an  ironical,  self- 
satisfied  smile  he  turns  away.  "He  is  no  baby  any 
more  whom  they  can  fool  with  silly  ghost  stories! 
He  has  now  got  on  to  the  tricks  of  the  grown 
people!" — It  is  the  first  fatal  step  towards  con- 
tempt oj  the  world,  contempt  of  his  mother,  and 
that  contempt  it  will  be  hard  to  eradicate. 

I  will  now  show  you  another  picture  to  con 
trast  with  this:  A  pregnant  mother  calls  her  son 
of  eight  years  to  her  side.  With  childish  impetuos- 
ity he  jumps  upon  her,  but  with  a  proud  and  happy 
smile  she  wards  him  off  and  tells  him  that  from 
now  on  he  must  handle  her  more  tenderly  and 
carefully  for  the  sake  of  a  tiny  little  baby  which 
she  carries  within  herself.  She  then  explains  to  him 
how  it  originated,  how  the  wee  little  thing  found  a 
warm  nest  prepared  for  its  reception  in  her  body, 
where  she  must  now  take  good  care  of  it  and  nour- 
ish it  from  her  own  blood,  so  that  it  will  grow  and 
grow  until  it  becomes  too  large  and  too  lively  to 
be  satisfied  with  its  narrow  resting-place,  when  she 
will,  with  much  pain,  bring  it  forth  to  the  world, 
so  that  they  all  can  enjoy  the  baby.  And  she  fur- 


—  186  — 

ther  shows  him  how  even  after  that  she  must  keep 
on  nourishing  it  from  her  bod}',  and  she  concludes 
with  the  remark  that  her  big  boy  also  came  thus 
from  his  mamma,  has  grown  from  a  small  kernel 
into  a  big  fellow,  as  yonder  tree  has  grown  from  a 
little  acorn  into  a  towering  oak.  Try  to  imagine 
now  that  this  boy's  thoughts  have  not  been  sullied 
by  the  dirt  which  "moral"  society  so  persistently 
throws  upon  this  subject.  Will  the  truth  not  appear 
far  nobler,  far  more  beautiful  to  him,  than  the  pret- 
tiest fairy-tale  which  you  could  invent  about  the 
coming  baby?  What  other  thoughts  and  feelings 
could  it  arouse  in  his  mind  than  a  deep  respect  and 
a  fervent  love  for  his  dear,  courageous  mamma, 
who  has  done  so  much  for  him,  and  must  yet  suffer 
so  much  more  in  order  to  give  him  a  lit'tle  play- 
mate? And  is  it  not  self-evident  that  it  will  natur- 
ally have  such  an  effect  upon  even  the  "toughest" 
fellow,  that,  whenever  he  sees  another  woman  in 
such  a  condition,  he  will  become  conscious  of  a 
spontaneous  feeling  of  deep  respect  for  the  impor- 
tant function  and  a  warm  appreciation  of  the  cour- 
ageous woman  ? 

But  it  is  not  only  the  boy  of  eight  years  for 
whom  we  demand  a  transition  from  the  lowest  and 
meanest  conceptions  to  noble  sentiments  —  almost 
all  our  men,  yes,  even  the  women  themselves,  are 
sorely  in  need  of  such  a  process  of  purification. 

Let  us  free  ourselves  from  a  false  and  super- 
stitious ''morality;"  then  the  state  of  pregnancy 
will  bring  to  women  no  humiliations,  no  painful 
embarrassments,  but  instead  a  more  attentive 


—  187  — 

care,  a  more  gentle  and  affectionate  treatment, 
and  induce  a  higher  appreciation  of  their  value; 
then  many-a  man  may  become  conscious  of  the 
fact  that  we  were  hardly  justified  in  calling  women 
the  "weaker  sex!" 


XVII.- 
Undesired  Children. 


COME  time  ago  a  man  suggested  this  practical 
objection  to  sex-freedom:  ''You  will  have  to 
admit  that  none  of  the  preventive  checks  are  pos- 
itively safe.  What  will  become  of  the  happiness  of 
two  life-companions  who  have  entered  into  family- 
relations  with  each  other,  if  the  woman  conceives 
from  another,  say  a  stranger,  who  has  aroused  her 
sensual  passion  for  a  few  hours?" 

I  have  shown  in  the  previous  chapter  that  this 
is  not  at  all  likely  to  happen.  It  Avould  be  far  less 
probable  than  that  one  of  them  should  be  maimed 
in  a  railroad  accident,  and  I  hope  that  no  reader 
will  say  that  because  of  the  latter  possibility  they 
should  never  travel  on  a  railway  train.  Let  us  sup- 
pose, however,  for  the  sake  of  the  argument,  that 
the  conception  has  taken  place.  In  the  first  place, 
we  have  good  reason  to  expect  that  even  in  this 
case  maternity  will  bring  to  the  woman  far  more 
joy  and  satisfaction,  more  honor  and  esteem  and 
less  humiliation  than  the  average  undesired  con- 
ception from  the  legal  husband  in  the  marriage  of 
to-day.  But  how  about  her  iriend  and  partner?' 


—  189  — 

How  will  he  look  at  the  matter?  That  will  depend 
upon  how  favorable  or  unfavorable  he  considers 
the  influence  of  the  other  man  in  procreation. 

You  understand,  of  course,  that  in  a  free  society 
such  impregnation  by  another  man  could  not  pos- 
sibly bring  any  disgrace,  dishonor,  or  humiliation 
to  the  partner.  As  I  will  explain  hereafter,  it  would 
often  be  desired  and  agreed  upon  voluntarily.  If, 
however,  the  partner  considers  himself  a  good 
agent  for  procreation,  he  will  certainly  not  desire 
such  a  thing.  He  may  then  think  it  quite  a  mis- 
fortune, but  he  will  of  course  share  it  faithfully  with 
his  friend.  That  would  be  a  queer  friendship  indeed 
which  would  not  be  strengthened  rather  than  weak- 
ened by  this  or  any  other  misfortune,  it  would  not 
be  valuable  enough  to  arouse  grief  at  its  loss. 

Remember,  furthermore,  that,  whatever  this 
impregnation  may  mean  otherwise,,  it  is  not  the 
result  of  dull  and  indifferent  submission  to  "mar- 
ital duty,"  but  of  an  act  of  sexual  love  and  hence 
we  may  well  expect  that  the  issue  will  be  a  strong 
and  healthy  child. 

The  direction  given  to  all  the  propensities  of 
the  child  at  the  instant  of  procreation  is  indeed  of 
great  importance,  but  the  influence  of  subsequent 
treatment,  the  quality  of  the  nutrition  and  educa- 
tion, is  equally  if  not  more  powerful.  Those  people 
who  doubt  this  and  speak  of  the  ever-unchange- 
able "nature"  of  a  child,  generally  do  not  think  of 
the  fact  that  education  begins  immediately  after 
conception.  For  the  first  nine  months  it  is  indirect, 
nf  course,  but  it  is  none  the  less  effective.  It  is-a 


-  190  — 

well  established  fact  (to  which  apparently  people 
paid  more  intelligent  attention  2000  years  ago 
than  they  do  now),  that  the  so-called  spiritual  as 
well  as  the  physical  life  of  the  pregnant  woman  is 
of  the  utmost  importance  to  the  child,  that  all  her 
thoughts  and  sensations  during  this  time  effect  the 
physical  and  mental  development  of  the  new  be- 
ing. Who,  excepting  the  mother,  could  have  a 
greater  influence  in  this  respect  than  the  partner 
and  life-companion  of  the  latter?  By  taking  care 
of  the  mother  and  the  child—or,  more  accurately— 
by  constantly  and  faithfully  assisting  in  the  sus- 
tentation  and  education  of  the  new  being  from  the 
beginning  of  its  existence,  the  man  earns  his  share 
in  the  child.  It  is  by  this,  and  by  this  alone,  that 
a  man  in  a  free  society  can  become  the  father  of 
a  child. 

You  might  ask  me  perhaps  whether  the  couple 
would  not  dread  the  interference  of  the  procreator. 
Certainly  not.  If  he  should  take  a  well-meaning  in- 
terest in  the  child,  this  might  be  of  great  benefit  to 
the  latter  and  to  the  parents.  If,  however,  they 
should  not  consider  this  influence  desirable — well, 
then  they  would  simply  keep  him  at  a  distance  or 
probably  might  not  inform  him  of  the  fact  at  all 
that  he  was  the  cause  of  the  addition  to  the  family. 
But  suppose  he  should  claim  the  child  as  "his  own?'' 
Well,  then,  he  will  simply  make  a  fool  of  himself. 
Ridiculous  presumption,  to  claim  rights  and  priv- 
ileges in  a  child  just  because  in  pursuit  of  pleasure 
and  the  satisfaction  of  his  natural  desire  he  has 
given  the  incentive  to  its  formation !  In  consider- 


—  191  — 

ation  of  the  fact  that  the  physical  and  mental  de- 
velopment of  the  ne\v  being  is  conditioned  to  a 
great  extent  by  the  character  or  quality  of  this  in- 
centive, it  would  certainly  appear  but  natural  that 
the  man  should  take  a  warm  interest  in  the  child 
procreated  by  him  — but  not  a  single  valid  reason 
could  be  found  why  this  should  give  him  any  right- 
ful chum. 

Remember,  dear  reader,  we  are  Freethinkers 
and  have  rejected  Christian  marriage,  hence  are 
obliged  to  do  our  own  thinking  in  regard  to  the 
question  of  rights  in  children.  In  trying  to  settle 
the  question  we  find  that  it  is  settled  already.  As 
we  want  woman  to  be  a  free  and  independent  be- 
ing, Ave  certainly  cannot  admit  that  for  a  certain 
time  a  part  of  her  body  should  be  owned  by  an- 
other. Therefore,  for  the  first  nine  months  of  its 
existence  the  child  is  unquestionably  the  absolute 
property  of  the  mother,  and  I  cannot  see  any 
reason  why  this  should  be  changed  by  the  fact 
that  she  separates  it  from  her  body.  Hence  it  is 
plain,  that  the  only  original  absolute  owner  of  the 
child  is  the  mother,  and  that  there  are  but  two 
ways  for  a  man  to  hold  a  child  as  "his  own.''  viz., 
either  by  possessing  the  mother  or  bargaining  \vith 
the  free  woman  for  a  share  in  her  issue.  I  prefer  the 
latter,  and  feeling  confident  that  we  men  will  al- 
ways have  many  valuable  things  to  offer  to  women, 
I  believe  that  mutually  satisfactory  agreements 
Avill  easily  be  effected. 

It  is  self-evident,  of  course,  that  in  a  free  society 
that  man  would  be  called  the  father  of  a  child  upon 


—  192  — 

whom  the  mother  had  bestowed  a  half-interest  in. 
it,  irrespective  of  whether  he  was  or  was  not  its  pro- 
creator.  This  is  perfectly  consistent  with  the  pres- 
ent interpretation  of  the  word,  but  we  to-day  also 
call  a  man  a  father  for  no  other  reason  than  that 
he  is  the  procreator  of  a  child.  This  latter  exten- 
sion of  the  meaning  we  should  reject,  as  it  is  very 
misleading  and  confusing  and  degrades  a  word 
which  contains  a  great  deal  of  beautiful  sentiment. 
I  will  now  explain  why  in  many  cases  the  fact 
that  the  father  and  the  procreator  are  different 
persons  will  be  the  result  of  voluntary  resolution. 
There  are  many  men  who  know  that  they  are  sub- 
ject to  some  serious  hereditary  disease  or  that  for 
other  reasons  they  are  unfit  for  healthy  procrea- 
tion, but  who  have  desire  for  sexual  intercourse, 
love  children,  are  excellently  qualified  for  support- 
ing and  educating  them,  and  long  for  a  home  and 
family.  A  large  number  of  these  marry,  beget  a 
number  of  sickly  children  that  are  born  but  to 
suffer  and  die  after  a  short  struggle — and  who  ac- 
cept it  all  in  stupid  patience  as  the  "will  of  God." 
Others  are  too  intelligent  and  conscientious  to  do 
this  and  go  through  life  lonely  and  disconsolate 
without  opportunity  to  utilize  their  noblest  qual- 
ities. And  yet  it  would  be  such  a  simple  matter  for 
all  these  to  enjo}^  life  to  the  full  extent  of  their 
capacity,  to  become  useful  members  of  human  so- 
ciety, thus  helping  us  improve  this  world  —  while 
now  they  are  furnishing  us  nothing  but  sad  and 
dreary  pictures  of  human  mal-adaptation.  No  pro- 
hibitory laws  would  be  necessary,  as  there  is  no> 


—  193  — 

-woman  in  the  world  who  would  find  any  pleasure 
in  the  thought  of  bringing  forth  a  diseased  child — 
enlightenment,  liberation  from  superstition,  is  all 
that  is  needed. 

A  free  man  will  examine  and  criticize  himself 
before  he  procreates.  If  he  finds  that  he  is  not  well 
adapted  for  the  purpose  (possibly  it  may  be  suffi- 
cient that  he  considers  others  better  adapted),  he 
will  let  another  man  cause  (not  makp,  as  it  is 
falsely  termed  sometimes)  the  children  which  will 
be  his  own.  As  explained  before,  he  will  then  utilize 
all  such  qualities  of  his  in  the  development  of  the 
child  as  he  considers  good  and  useful  and  in  this 
way  may  have  a  healthy  and  happy  family. 

The  case  may  appear  somewhat  more  difficult 
for  women,  but  you  may  rest  assured  that  any 
woman  will  prefer  to  resign  the  joys  of  maternity 
rather  than  to  bear  a  child  with  the  expectation 
that  it  will  be  infected  with  a  serious  disease  of  her 
own.  This  will  not  bar  her  from  the  enjoyment  of 
sexual  intercourse  nor  from  the  most  intimate 
union  of  friendship  with  a  man.  Instead  of  bearing 
a  child  herself,  she  will  adopt  the  issue  of  another 
woman,  to  whom  it  would  be  a  great  burden,  but 
she  will  not  wait  until  this  is  born,  but  accept  it  as 
soon  as  possible  after  conception.  She  will  not 
simply  buy  the  child,  but,  as  in  the  case  of  a  man, 
will  try  to  secure  for  herself,  even  before  its  birth, 
a  certain  moral  claim  to  the  child  by  the  most 
tender  and  attentive  solicitude  for  the  mother 
during  pregnancy,  lactation,  and  the  first  period 
of  maternity.  I  doubt  very  much,  of  course,  that 


—  194  — 

she  will  have  a  chance  to  make  such  an  arrange- 
ment with  any  "free"  woman,  but,  alas,  for  a  long* 
time  to  come  there  will  still  be  many  unfortunate 
"non-free"  women,  for  whom  such  adoption  would 
indeed  be  a  great  blessing,  all  the  more  because  the 
"property  right"  in  children  will  not  mean  an  ex- 
clusive right  to  love  them,  but  simply  the  exclusive 
control  of  their  maintenance  and  education  during 
the  time  of  their  dependence. 

I  should  not  be  surprised  if  many  readers  will 
think,  in  reading  this  chapter,  that  I  am  "going 
rather  far,"  and  "expecting  a  little  too  much"  of 
free  men  and  women,  but  I  claim  that  these  condi- 
tions are  no  more  than  the  inevitable  results  of 
liberation  from  superstition.  The  only  maxim  of 
the  free  mail  is  this:  "Know  thyself,  and  then  use 
all  vour  faculties  to  the  best  of  vour  understanding 

«/  «  C7 

for  your  own  happiness,  for  the  most  satisfactory 
enjoyment  of  all  the  good  things  which  this  world 
has  to  offer !"— This  may  sound  abominably  egois- 
tic to  many  readers,  but  do  not  be  frightened ;  any 
sane  person  will  soon  perceive  that  for  his  own 
happiness  he  needs  the  happiness  of  many  others, 
yes,  that  it  is  dependent  even  to  quite  an  extent 
upon  the  happiness  of  all  humanity ! 


XVIII. 
Licentiousness. 


T  X  this  chapter  I  will  state  a  few  reasons  why  sex- 
ual freedom  will  not  only  rescue  us  from  the  evils 
of  continence,  but  will  free  us  effectively  from  the 
evils  of  licentiousness,  that  is,  from  physically  and 
mentally  degrading  excess  in  sexual  pleasures. 

AVe  guard  against  such  excess  by  removing  its 
causes,  which  are  mainly  these: 

1.  Morbid    desires    caused    by  unnatural  re- 
straint. 

2.  The  charm  of  the  unknown;  the  tempta- 
tion of  the  "forbidden  fruit. '' 

3.  The  neglect  of  the  subject  of  sexuality  in 
education. 

4.  The  fact  that  sexual  intercourse  is  consid- 
ered the  inevitable  result,  the  ultimation  of  any 
true  love  between  a  man  and  a  woman. 

.".  The  possession  of  a  human  being  for  the 
purpose  of  sexual  service,  be  it  through  legal  or 
moral  laws,  a  commercial  bargain  or  a  declaration 
of  love,  be  it  "limited"  or  for  life. 

6.  The  lack  of  any  sweet  poetic  flavor  in  the 
sex-intercourse  of  ''civilized"  society — the  general 
joylessness. 


—  196  — 

I  believe  it  will  require  no  further  argument  to 
enable  any  reader  to  see  these  points.  None  of  them 
will  be  disputed,  excepting  probably  the  last  named, 
to  which  I  will  devote  some  more  attention. 

The  famous  German  philosopher,  Fr.  Nietzsche, 
says :  "The  mother  of  licentiousness  is  not  joy,  but 
joylessness."  Everywhere  you  will  see  this  state- 
ment verified.  The  most  extreme  excess  of  which 
we  hear  occurs  in  so-called  "self-abuse""  (every  spe- 
cialist in  sexual  diseases  will  testify  to  this).  It  is 
a  constant  craving  for  pleasui'e  and  joy  without 
ever  feeling  the  sweet  and  serene  sensation  of  real 
satisfaction ;  it  is  always  only  an  exhaustion  with- 
out contentment.  The  nearer  to  this  any  other  sex- 
act  comes  in  "joylessness,"  the  more  it  will  incite 
to  excess,  leading  to  the  desire  to  make  up  by 
quantity  for  the  deficiency  in  quality.  Hence  we 
hear  of  the  most  unnatural  and  most  harmful  arti- 
ficial means  which  are  used  in  such  "joyless"  cases 
in  order  to  gain  the  capacity  for  this  "quantity." 
that  is,  to  cause  artificially  the  necessary  excita- 
tion. 

For  the  free  man,  who  must  choose  and  be 
chosen  for  each  and  every  one  of  his  sex-acts,  each 
association  will  be  a  beautiful  love-idyl  full  of  gen- 
uine physical  and  spiritual  joy,  resulting  in  a  sweet 
and  restful  sensation  of  satisfaction  which  may  well 
and  pleasantly  occupy  his  thoughts  for  a  long- 
time. There  is  no  danger  that  he  will  ever  become 
licentious ! 


XIX. 
The  Sense  of  Shame. 


COME  time  ago,  I  tried  to  give  to  a  man,  who 

was  very  much  interested  in  the  subject,  an  idea 
of  life  in  a  free  society.  Nothing  seemed  to  shock 
him  so  terribly  as  the  thought  that  there  "the 
people  would  lose  all  sense  of  shame  and  might 
even  go  so  far  as  to  enjoy  the  sex-act  in  public!" 

I  of  course  laughed  at  him,  and  answered  that 
even  the  most  vulgar  of  our  free  men  and  women 
would  be  extremely  careful  not  to  have  him  or  any 
other  of  his  ilk  as  a  witness  to  their  love-acts,  not 
because  they  were  ashamed  of  their  affectional  de- 
monstrations, but  because  the  disgusting  sight  of 
a  man  with  such  low  and  vulgar  ideas  would  seri- 
ously interfere  with  their  pleasure. 

He  had  no  more  to  say.  I  thought  at  the  time 
that  he  was  a  rare  exception,  but,  alas,  I  have  since 
heard  so  many  similar  expressions  from  pseudo- 
radicals,  that  it  seems  necessary  to  argue  the  ques- 
tion. 

For  many  the  expression,  ' 'sense  of  shame," 
seems  to  have  no  other  meaning  than  that  you  are 
thoroughly  ashamed  of  your  sex-nature,  that  you 


—  198  — 

should  blush  at  the  slightest  allusion  to  it,  and 
faint  when  it  is  spoken  of  in  plain  terms.  To  these 
we  can  say  without  further  discussion,  that  we  of 
course  expect  that  in  the  free  societv  we  shall  com- 
pletely eradicate  this  absurd  and  silly  feeling. 

However,  the  true  interpretation  of  the  term  is 
this :  The  feeling  of  reluctance  and  aversion  to  ex- 
pose, to  openly  show  or  express  anything,  which  is 
considered  odious,  ugly,  repulsive,  or  non-aesthetic. 

For  many  centuries  the  most  fanatical  and  ter- 
ribly persistent  exertions  have  been  made  to  force 
humankind  to  look  upon  everything  which  is  sen- 
sual, everything  which  may  incite  to  sexual  desire, 
as  low,  mean,  ugly,  and  vulgar — and  with  equal 
persistency  human  nature  has  constantly  opposed 
this  view.  This  has  necessarily  caused  a  terrible 
confusion  in  men's  conception  of  the  beautiful,  so 
that  very  soon  almost  all  human  beings  became 
more  or  less  shameless,  and  with  the  result  that 
now  we  hardly  expect  any  true  sense  of  shame  any- 
where except,  possibly,  in  ''sweet  sixteen !" 

We  cannot  expect  to  have  a  somewhat  general 
uniformity  in  the  judging  of  ugliness  and  beauty 
until  these  awful  inconsistencies  and  contradictions 
are  removed.  After  we  have  attained  this  we  will 
find  a  genuine,  noble  sense  of  shame  in  all  civilized 
human  beings,  and  more  of  it  in  the  old  and  wise 
"man  of  the  world"  than  in  the  young  woman.  It 
will  naturally  be  most  sensitive  in  regard  to  the 
intimacies  of  love-  and  sex-life. 

It  would  be  a  mistake  to  assume  that  present 
society  is  shameless  because  it  finds  a  particular 


—  199  — 

pleasure  in  voluntarily  exposing  the  odious  —  in 
most  cases  this  is  simply  the  result  of  a  misunder- 
standing of  the  taste  of  the  audience.  Such  errors 
must  be  expected  to-day.  Everywhere  we  have 
occasion  to  notice  that  one  part  of  society  regards 
something  as  noble  and  beautiful  which  appears  to 
the  other  part  odious  and  repulsive;  again  and 
again  we  see  men  furiously  condemn  as  low,  mean, 
and  ugly,  that  which  in  secrecy  gives  them  great 
pleasure.  It  is  no  wonder,  therefore,  that  many  per- 
sons, who  make  these  observations  without  realiz- 
ing the  "why/'  lose  all  "good  taste, ''take  every 
sign  of  disgust  for  a  hypocritical  disguise — and 
hence  become  shameless  out  of  mere  ignorance. 

These  dangers  will  disappear  in  a  free  society. 
There  real  ugliness  will  receive  no  ''mysterious" 
charm  through  its  relation  to  the  sexual,  no  real 
beauty  will  be  condemned  because  it  is  "sensual." 
A  woman  who  has  the  perfect  figure  of  a  Venus 
may  show  herself  anywhere  at  any  time  in  com- 
plete nudity  and  every  free  human  being  will  feel 
nothing  but  the  genuine  joy  of  contemplating  real 
beauty.  How  absurd  it  seems  to  call  it  shameless 
to  show  us  something  beautiful ! 

I  doubt,  of  course,  whether  such  a  public  expo- 
sition may  ever  be  expected.  Even  a  Venus  may 
consider  it  far  more  advantageous  to  give  the  full 
view  of  her  bodily  charms  only  in  the  most  favor- 
able light,  on  the  most  auspicious  occasion,  where 
she  is  sure  of  passionate  appreciation.  But  this 
has  no  bearing  upon  the  question  before  us,  and 
we  can  leave  that  to  the  woman  herself.  Certain  it 


—  200  — 

is,  that  any  woman  who  is  not  convinced  of  the 
ideal  beauty  of  her  so-called  ''secret  charms"  will 
prefer  to  modestly  cover  them  and  never  to  drop 
the  last  vesture  except  when  alone  or  with  the  pas- 
sionately enamored  lover — being  well  aware  that 
in  the  transforming  light  of  sensual  passion  many 
features  may  appear  wonderfully  beautiful  which 
would  fail  deplorably  under  the  critical  eyes  of  the 
cool  observer;  yes,  which  might  even  appear  de- 
cidedly ugly  to  the  dispassionate  beholder. 

No  respectful,  humane,  and  beautiful  presenta- 
tion in  art,  in  literature,  or  in  conversation,  of  the 
sexual  relations,  even  if  ever  so  clear  and  distinct, 
will  then  be  condemned.  On  the  contrary,  real 
beauty  will  be  appreciated  in  this  even  more  than 
in  any  other  field.  To  treat  it,  however,  with  such 
sneering  contempt  as  is  customary  to-day,  to  find 
satisfaction  in  villifying  sensual  love  and  dragging 
it  through  the  mire,  will  promptly  be  denounced 
by  every  free  man  and  woman  as  the  superlative  of 
shamelessness. 

Would  the  sex-act  ever  be  seen  in  public  in  a 
free  society?  As  there  would  be  neither  a  legal  nor 
a  moral  law  against  it,  and  as  it  in  itself  would  not 
appear  mean  or  ugly  to  any  free  being,  it  might 
seem  possible.  But  so  long  as  there  is  the  least 
danger  that  a  single  wnfree  witness  might  make  his 
customary  sh&meless  remarks  about  it,  it  certainly 
would  not  occur.  But  there  are  many  other  reasons 
which  would  preclude  such  action,  even  in  the  freest 
society.  I  have  already  intimated  one  of  them  in 
the  foregoing. 


—  201  — 

The  physical  love-union  of  a  Venus  and  an 
Adonis  would  be  looked  upon  by  old  and  young, 
by  the  weak  and  the  strong,  as  a  noble  and  beauti- 
ful spectacle,  but  there  is  but  little  chance  of  any 
other  public  presentation  of  it  except  in  the  pro- 
ductions of  art. 

For  reviewing  and  comparing  and  choosing, 
for  the  ever  charming  wooing  and  winning  of  sex- 
ual love,  they  may  desire  the  jovial  company  of 
many — but  for  the  most  intimate  physical  union 
every  loving  couple  will  prefer  (even  a  thousand 
years  hence)  to  withdraw  from  the  critical  eyes  of 
all  observers  to  a  quiet  and  cosy  retreat — not  be- 
cause of  a  "sense  of  shame"  —  but  because  a  third 
person  could  not  possibly  share  their  feelings  and 
would  therefore  bring  a  marring  discord  into  their 
beautiful  harmony. 


XX. 
Obscenity. 

person  having  fairly  good  sense  must 
admit  that  the  strong  and  ineradicable  nat- 
ural impulse,  the  longing  for  sexual  pleasures,  must 
naturally  make  conversation  and  literature  on 
that  subject  particularly  interesting,  must  create 
a  desire  to  read  and  talk  about  sensual  sub- 
jects. Tyrannical  prohibition  has  the  tendency  to 
strengthen  the  desire  and  in  many  cases  changes 
the  vague  longing  into  a  morbid  craving.  Where 
are  the  chances  to  satisfy  this  craving?  Whenever 
a  beautiful  love-relation  or  a  happy  marriage  is 
described  not  a  word  is  mentioned  about  the  sex- 
ual— "oh,  no,  that  would  make  it  obscene!"  But 
when  a  mean  and  vulgar  action  or  a  horrible  crime 
is  made  public,  then  the  sexual  aspect  is  generally 
pictured  out  in  detail— as  the  most  shocking  part 
of  all  of  course !  It  is  this  "most  shocking  part," 
however,  which  causes  the  agreeable  titillationy 
which  gives  the  "piquant  flavor"  to  the  story. 
Wherever  we  find  this  "piquancy"  it  is  associated 
with  vulgarity,  odiousness,  meanness,  and  deprav- 
ity, but  one  gets  used  to  these! — and  finally  they 


—  203  — 

may  even  have  an  independent  charm  of  them- 
selves. 

Think  of  the  talks  of  your  chaste  and  respect- 
able housewives !  what  a  great  pleasure  they  find 
in  discussing  "scandal''  and  "criminal  relations" 
(oh,  what  a  "piquant"  phrase!).  Must  we  suppose 
that  they  all  have  such  low  and  depraved  char- 
acters that  they  find  pleasure  in  "running  down" 
other  people?  Certainly  not  —  at  least,  it  is  not 
their  original,  natural  inclination.  They  also  can- 
not resist  the  tempting  charm  of  "piquancy."  They 
are  well  aware  of  this,  they  are  ashamed  of  it,  and 
hence  consider  it  quite  necessary  in  order  to  prove 
their  own  "purity"  and  "innocence,"  to  furiously 
denounce  the  "terrible  immorality"  of  others,  never 
to  speak  of  any  "illicit  love"  without  throwing  an 
extra  heap  of  dirt  upon  sexuality  in  general.  In 
the  anxious  attempt  to  prove  their  own  "'moral- 
ity.'' they  become  grossly  vulgar  and  obscene. 

Listen  to  the  chat  of  the  jolly  traveling-men, 
trying  to  while  awny  the  ennui  of  waiting  for  the 
next  train  by  telling  jokes  unfit  for  feminine  ears. 
One  of  them  tells  a  pretty  story  about  the  trials 
and  adventures  of  two  passionate  lovers,  in  which 
some  queer  accidents  cause  ludicrous  mistakes  and 
comical  complications— a  story  which  would  be  ac- 
cepted by  the  most  sensitive  free  man  or  woman 
with  a  hearty  laugh.  Another  joke  follows  which 
is  but  a  shameless  derision  of  sexual  intercourse — 
the  sex-act  pictured  being  the  meanest  and  filthiest 
imaginable  and  the  point  of  the  joke  requiring  the 
description  of  the  basest  criminal  actions.  Both 


—  204  — 

jokes  are  promptly  declared  exceedingly  "smutty," 
and  both  cause  great  merriment.  And  if  the  first 
gentleman  has  gone  a  little  farther  in  enumerating 
the  details  of  the  affair,  or  if  he  has  been  rather 
enthusiastic  in  describing  the  so-called  "secret 
charms"  of  the  woman  in  the  case,  then  his  joke 
will  of  course  be  called  the  "smuttiest"  of  the  two ! 
An  excellent  object  lesson  indeed  in  which  to  study 
the  "good  taste,"  the  "sensitive  aesthetic  feeling," 
of  our  "civilized  nation"  as  contrasted  to  the  coarse 
and  vulgar  conceptions  of  the  cannibals  ! 

The  confusion  and  contradiction  resulting  from 
a  false  morality  opposing  strong  natural  inclina- 
tions has  not  only  killed  all  true  and  noble  sense 
of  shame,  but  it  constantly  exerts  a  general  cor- 
rupting influence  upon  the  character  of  young  and 
old. 

Observe  the  youth  in  his  secret  thoughts,  in  his 
secret  doings.  The  powerful  impulse  is  fully  devel- 
oped, but  he  has  no  clear  understanding  of  its 
essential  meaning.  He  dare  not  speak  of  it  to  his 
parents  or  to  any  loved  one;  the  moral  books 
which  they  give  to  him  do  not  contain  a  word 
about  it — but  he  does  know  a  certain  society  (which, 
in  fact,  he  thoroughly  despises),  where  he  can  hear 
much  about  it,  there  is  plenty  of  reading  matter 
(which  heretofore  appeared  odious  and  repulsive  to 
him)  in  which  sex-relations  are  referred  to  very 
plainly.  What  he  is  looking  for  is  associated  every- 
where with  vulgarity  and  depravity,  he  is  forced  to 
scrape  it  out  of  the  dirt,  but  the  many  mysterious 


—  205  — 

allusions  increase  the  craving — and  as  to  the  dirt — 
one  gets  used  to  that  after  a  while ! 

Why  do  our  young  men  care  so  much  for  the 
"Police  Gazette?"  Have  they  all  a  natural  inclina- 
tion for  vice  and  crime,  that  they  should  have  such 
a  longing  to  read  about  it?  Xo,  but  every  one  of 
the  horrible  pictures  in  this  detestable  publication 
is  closely  connected  with  and  plainly  alludes  to 
sexual  action.  That  is  what  the  boys  are  looking 
for.  The  criminal  part  makes  them  shudder  with 
horror  in  the  beginning,  but  that  one  secret  longing 
forces  them  again  and  again  to  read  those  flam- 
boyant descriptions  of  seduction,  rape,  and  per- 
versity resulting  in  beastly  fights  and  murder — 
until  they  have  become  thoroughly  accustomed  to 
the  thought  of  vulgarity,  depravity,  and  crime, 
until  finally  these  thoughts  have  come  to  have  a 
"piquant  charm''  in  themselves. 

I  wonder  if  some  of  my  readers  will  exclaim, 
"Let  us  prohibit  the  'Police  Gazette!'  ' 

Xo ! — let  us  stop  these  fatal  fooleries !  It  is  pro- 
hibition which  has  caused  all  of  the  misery  and  de- 
gradation !  Give  us  freedom  from  superstition, give 
our  young  men  a  chance  to  speak  freely  and  openly 
about  their  natural  impulses  to  the  men  and  women 
who  are  nearest  and  dearest  to  them— let  the  most 
gifted  poets,  the  most  humane  authors,  initiate 
him,  without  reserve,  without  mystic  paraphrases, 
into  the  knowledge  of  sexual  love  and  its  noblest 
and  healthiest  gratification — then  the  "Police  Ga- 
zette'' can  do  us  no  more  harm  and  will  soon  die 
from  want  of  subscribers. 


—  20G  — 

Give  us  liberty!  then  we  will  soon  be  delivered 
from  that  vast  amount  of  filthy  and  obscene  lit- 
erature which  corrupts  our  youth  to-day — delivered 
not  by  sneaking  spies  a,  la,  Comstock,  but  by  the 
book -dealers  themselves,  who  will  promptly  burn 
the  stuff,  for  which  they  will  find  no  more  buyers, 
except  probably  a  few  cranky  collectors  of  curios- 
ities, who  may  want  to  save  some  specimens  as 
gloomy  mementos  of  a  sad  and  dreary  age  of  tyr- 
anny and  superstition ! 


XXL 
Prostitution. 


PROSTITUTION!  —  the  mere  mention  of  this 

\vord  is  sufficient  to  cause  a  shudder  of  horror 
in  ; -'sweet  innocence !"— AYhat  is  it  that  makes  pros- 
titution so  horrible? 

Is  it  that  women  use  their  charms  and  abil- 
ities for  making1  money,  offering-  to  men  a  pleasure 
which  they  need  and  desire?  No,  for  every  actress, 
every  public  singer,  does  the  same. 

Is  it  that  they  often  ruin  their  health  thereby? 
That  makes  the  sacrifice  for  men  so  much  the 
greater,  and  would  be  a  reason  for  respect,  or  at 
least  for  pity,  never  for  contempt. 

Is  it.that  they  also  endanger  the  health  of  men  ? 
The  ignorance  and  carelessness  of  men  are  mostly 
to  blame  for  this,  and,  furthermore,  we  must  not 
forget  that  they  also  do  considerable  to  benefit  the 
health  of  men. 

Is  it  that  they  live  in  such  odious  places  and 
associate  with  such  mean  and  depraved  men?  That 
is  certainly  not  their  free  choice;  we  have  forced 
them  thither  by  our  scorn  and  contempt,  by  our 
persecutions — But 


—  208  — 

That  they  submit  without  affection,  that  they 
misuse  a  beautiful  gift  of  nature  (which  would  pro- 
cure for  them  many  an  ideal  enjoyment  of  love) 
and  degrade  it  to  a  mere  commercial  factor — yes, 
that  might  be  a  valid  reason  for  your  contempt, 
provided,  however,  that  you  yourselves,  dear  ladies, 
are  sure  you  have  never  misused  the  gift,  that  you 
have  always  with  it  brought  joy  and  happiness  to 
yourselves  and  others,  without  being  influenced  in 
its  use  by  gold  or  other  economic  considerations. 
Can  you  say  that  much  for  yourselves?  No !  Well, 
so  long  as  you  are  silly  and  ignorant  enough  to 
believe  that  you  can  do  nothing  better  with  this 
truly  beautiful  natural  impulse  than  to  make  the 
most  sickening  and  unnatural  exertions  to  sup- 
press it  until  you  get  a  chance  to  submit  for  life  to 
one  man  as  a  mere  sexual  slave,  in  which  unions 
the  "economic  consideration"  is  very  seldom  for- 
gotten, and  where  even  in  the  most  favorable 
cases  a  few  love-embraces  are  promptly  followed 
by  thousands  of  vulgar  prostitutions  in  your  so- 
called  marriage-bed — in  short,  so  long  as  you  can- 
not make  a  better  showing  of  your  use  of  the  gift, 
you  are  not  justified  in  looking  down  upon  any 
woman  because  of  the  mere  fact  that  she  temporar- 
ily submits  to  a  sexual  embrace  for  pecuniary  recom- 
pense. Your  average  action  is  no  less  a  "devoting 
of  noble  faculties  to  low  and  despicable  purposes, '; 
hence  no  less  a  prostitution,  than  hers,  and  the 
only  difference  consists  in  the  fact  that,  while  you 
receive  the  praise  and  commendation  of  society  and 
therefore  can  easily  retain  your  dignity  and  self- 


esteem,  the  so-called  prostitute  is  promptly  cast 
out  like  a  disgusting  leper  and  must  (unless  she  is 
exceptionally  intelligent), soon  lose  her  self-respect 
and  with  it  many  good  qualities,  or  must  become 
an  enraged  fiend,  of  whom  it  is  absurd  to  expect 
any  noble  action  toward  the  immense  crowds  of 
her  powerful  enemies,  who  have  treated  her  in  such 
a  dastardly  ignoble,  shameless  manner.  What  has 
she  done?  Seeing  that  so  many  men  are  craving 
for  a  pleasure  which  she  is  willing  to  give,  being 
sorely  in  need  of  the  metal,  without  which  even 
''respectability"  is  of  but  little  account  in  our 
''civilized  country,"  she  bestows  the  pleasure  and 
receives  in  return  the  voluntarily  offered  reward. 
She  has  harmed  no  one,  she  has  interfered  with  no 
rights  of  her  fellow  beings,  but,  like  a  thousand 
Furies,  enraged  "society''  rushes  upon  her,  lashing 
her  with  scorn  and  contempt,  torturing  her  with 
brutal  physical  force.  And  if  in  this  unjust  and  un- 
equal combat  the  poor  defenseless  creature  begins 
to  spit  and  scratch  and  bite,  the  "respectable" 
woman  of  fashionable  society  exclaims  Avith  cheap 
dignity  from  her  safe  and  exalted  position,  "See 
the  miserably  vulgar  wretch  !  How  can  a  woman 
become  so  depraved  as  to  lose  all  sense  of  decorum 
and  propriety?" 

The  gloomy  pictures  of  degeneracy  and  vulgar- 
ity which  we  observe  to-day  in  the  tram  of  "pros- 
titution" may  well  cause  us  a  shudder  of  horror, 
but  after  we  have  freed  ourselves  from  supersti- 
tious fanaticism,  we  will  see  that  it  is  not  the  fact 
of  prostitution  in  itself  which  causes  all  this  misery 


—  210  — 

— that  it  is  but  the  natural  result  of  our  derision 
and  contempt,  of  our  tyrannical  persecutions! 
What  I  said  about  prohibition  in  conversation  and 
literature  on  sexual  subjects,  is  equally  true  of  pro- 
hibition in  sexual  action,  viz.: 

That  a  healthy  young  man,  in  whom  the  im- 
pulse is  fully  developed,  should  like  to  speak  and 
read  about  sexual  subjects  is  not  at  all  dreadful- 
it  is  simply  natural— but  that  you  force  him  to  be- 
€ome  accustomed  to  dirt  in  order  to  satisfy  the  de- 
sire,— that  is  indeed  dreadful,  and  if  by  further  in- 
terdiction and  a  medieval  censorship  you  drive 
him  into  the  most  secret  by-waj'S,  it  may  justly  be 
termed  the  superlative  of  stupidity ! 

That  the  young-  man  should  long  for  the  gratifi- 
cation of  his  sexual  impulse  is  not  dreadful,  it  is 
simply  natural — but  that  you  force  him  to  asso- 
ciate with  vulgarity  and  depravity  in  order  to  ob- 
tain what  he  requires,  that  is  indeed  dreadful,  and 
if  your  fanaticism  should  rob  him  of  this  last 
chance  and  drive  him  to  the  most  secret  gratifi- 
€ation,  then,  that  may  also  be  called  the  super- 
lative of  stupidity ! 

Thousands  of  sermons  have  been  preached  on 
that  dreadful  vice,  prostitution,  thousands  of 
voluminous  books  have  been  written  about  it; 
they  all  give  us  terribly  realistic  illustrations  of 
how  so  many  of  our  best  young  men  are  led  into 
vice  and  crime  by  this  evil,  how  it  brings  misery 
and  disease  into  many  of  our  happiest  families — 
and,  alas!  they  can  hardly  exaggerate  in  this,  for 
the  conditions  are  indeed  horrible!  But  what  do 


—  211  — 

all  these  would-be  reformers  offer  as  a  remedy  for 
this  evil?  More  stringent  laws,  more  tyranny, 
more  persecution,  severer  judgment,  severer  pun- 
ishment, police  control,  police  regulation  and  regis- 
tration, public  branding!  Ah,  ''what  fools  these 
mortals  be!" — they  all  seem  to  desire  to  increase 
just  that  which  is  the  one  and  only  cause  of  all 
this  misery!  When  I  perceive  this  blind,  fanatic 
fury,  it  makes  me  think  that  all  the  depravity  in 
human  nature  is  but  the  result  of  contempt  and 
persecution  by  those  persons  who  consider  them- 
selves abler,  worthier  creatures  and  hence  entitled 
to  sit  in  judgment  over  their  fellow-beings.  But  it 
arouses  still  other  thoughts.  Why  is  it  that  this 
terrible  treatment  has  not  made  these  ostracized 
women  far  worse  than  they  really  are?  How  can 
we  explain  it  that  we  can  still  find  in  them  many 
good  and  amiable  qualities,  that  they  have  not  all 
become  fiendish  criminals  through  the  so  funda- 
mental natural  feelings  of  resentment  and  self-de- 
fense? That  they  are  no  worse  might  lead  one  to 
suppose  that  the  most  tender-hearted  and  good- 
natured  of  women  choose  this  vocation.  But,  no, 
there  is  another  explanation :  They  do  not  believe 
in  the  sincerity  of  our  manifestations  of  disgust 
and  contempt.  They  see  so  much  miserable  hyp- 
ocrisy all  around  them  that  they  soon  lose  the  last 
vestige  of  faith  in  the  nobility  of  human  nature. 
There  is  not  a  fanatic  Christian  in  the  world  who 
is  more  thoroughly  convinced  that  "we  are  all 
miserably  depraved  sinners."  than  the  average 
prostitute.  With  a  doubting,  ironical  smile  she  will 


—  212  — 

think  of  the  manifestations  of  disgust  with  which 
the  "respectable"  woman  turns  away  from  her,  and 
a  scornful  laugh  would  greet  any  man  who  should 
boast  of  his  "purity"  (provided,  of  course,  that  she 
sees  no  advantage  in  playing  the  part  of  a  repent- 
ant sinner  for  a  while).  The  conviction  that  we 
are  not  justified  in  our  judgment  because  we  are 
equal  sinners  hardens  these  women  against  our 
poisonous  arrows  of  scorn  and  derision.  It  is  their 
thorough  contempt  for  humanity  in  general  which 
keeps  them  from  becoming  vindictive  criminals, 
but  it  is  this,  together  with  the  resulting  loss  of 
self-respect,  which  also  finally  causes  a  general 
moral  depravity  in  nearly  all  of  them. 

Most  authors  who  treat  on  the  subject  of  pros- 
titution try  to  make  us  believe  that  all  women  who 
choose  this  vocation  perish  in  misery  after  a  few 
years.  I  suppose  they  would  excuse  this  falsehood 
by  the  discouragement-theory,  but  it  is  a  falsehood 
nevertheless.  Many  of  the  weaker  ones  are  indeed 
wrecked  in  a  very  short  time,  but  there  are  also 
many,  especially  among  the  more  intelligent,  who 
retain  physical  and  mental  health  up  to  old  age 
and  who,  even  as  old  women,  cause  us  a  great  deal 
of  trouble  with  their  merciless  intrigues.  Another 
fact  which,  with  more  zeal  for  discouragement  than 
truth,  is  generally  omitted,  is  this :  So  far  as  clean- 
liness of  the  body  in  general  and  the  sexual  parts 
in  particular  and  a  proper  and  intelligent  care  of 
the  latter  are  concerned,  the  so-called  "fast  women'r 
of  the  better  class  are  far  superior  to  the  great  ma- 
jority of  "virtuous"  women. 


—  213  — 

All  writers  on  the  subject  tell  us  that  this  vice 
has  existed  at  all  times  and  in  all  countries  where 
there  was  any  compulsion  in  the  sexual  relations. 
Instead  of  duly  heeding  this  clear  and  distinct  les- 
son of  history,  most  of  them  cannot  draw  any 
other  conclusion  from  the  fact  than  that  embodied 
in  the  silly  phrase,  "It  is  a  necessary  evil!" 

Necessary?  —  For  whom?  —  For  the  ostracized, 
the  outlaws?  — Oh  no,  sheriff,  police  and  hangman 
would  soon  clear  away  the  "evil"  then!  For  the 
poor,  perhaps?  They  could  not  pay  for  the  luxury. 

Necessary,  indeed!  —  Necessary  for  your  high- 
born, well-bred  young  man,  that  he  may  not  be 
driven  to  despair  in  the  terrible  labyrinth ! 

Necessary  for  your  highest  officers,  your  most 
respected  citizens,  your  pillars  of  society,  that  they 
may  keep  on  lying  and  cheating,  in  perfect  safety, 
that  they  may  always  say  "Yes"  and  "Amen"  with 
solemn  serenity  whenever  the  pure  girl,  the  vir- 
tuous wife,  or  the  hyper-moral  maiden-aunt  sing 
the  praises  of  that  ideal  exclusive  love ! 

Necessary,  indeed,  lest  strong  desire  might  in- 
spire some  of  the*se  men  with  the  courage  to  de- 
nounce these  silly  fantasms  and  tell  the  plain  truth 
that  they  are  no  more  than  average,  natural  human 

beings  with  natural  human  impulses ! 

* 
*         * 

The  word  prostitution  means  the  use  of  vain- 
able  and  noble  faculties  for  low  and  vile  purposes. 
It  does  not  designate  a  certain  action,  because  the 
estimate  of  the  action  is  dependent  to  quite  an  ex- 
tent upon  the  individual's  views  of  the  value  of  the 


—  214  — 

faculties  and  his  judgment  of  the  purposes  for 
which  they  are  used.  To  very  many  people  any 
sexual  intercourse  outside  of  a  monogamic  union 
appears  extremely  vile,  hence  as  prostitution.  This 
superstitious  view  we  need  not  consider  any  more, 
as  all  intelligent  reformers  rejected  it  long  ago. 

There  is  a  particular  action  which  is  unan- 
imously termed  prostitution,  namely,  the  indis- 
criminate offering  of  the  sexual  faculties  for  bus- 
iness purposes.  As  the  present  generation  does  not 
generally  consider  business  purposes  vile  purposes, 
we  might  dispute  even  here  the  justifiableness  of 
the  term.  But,  although  the  purpose  may  not  be 
the  lowest,  it  certainly  is  in  these  cases  such  an  im- 
mense ''lowering"  of  a  truly  beautiful  faculty  that 
even  a  free  man  would  not  hesitate  to  call  it  pros- 
titution, just  as  he  would  call  it  a  prostitution  of 
his  genius  if  a  highly  gifted  and  ingenious  painter, 
instead  of  using  his  faculty  where  it  would  give 
happiness  and  satisfaction  to  himself  and  true  joy 
to  others,  should  paint  business-signs  simply  be- 
cause this  brought  him  a  larger  income.  As  hardly 
any  one  seriously  questions  to-day  the  absolute 
right  of  the  painter  to  paint  business-signs  instead 
of  giving  us  beautiful  works  of  art,  so  a  free  person 
would  not  for  a  minute  question  the  right  of  a 
woman  to  afford  sexual  satisfaction  for  money  in- 
stead of  enjoying  the  delights  of  love.  He  may 
criticize  the  foolish  choice,  the  vulgar  taste;  he 
may  try  to  educate  to  a  higher  conception  of  use 
and  joy,  to  show  a  better  and  happier  way  of  liv- 
ing, but  he  will  invariably  leave  the  final  decision 


—  215  — 

of  the  question  to  the  man  or  woman  most  im- 
mediately concerned.  And  if  real  material  want  has 
caused  the  prostitution,  he  will  promptly  concede 
that  bread  is  even  more  necessary  than  the  enjoy- 
ment of  love  or  the  satisfaction  of  genius,  he  will 
feel  no  disrespect  for  these  two  '"prostitutes,"  and 
his  entire  disgust  will  turn  against  the  surround- 
ing conditions  which  have  caused  the  involuntary 
degradation. 

The  foregoing  expression,  "indiscriminate  offer- 
ing of  the  sexual  faculties  for  business  purposes," 
will  be  conceded  to  be  the  generally  accepted  ex- 
planation of  the  word  "prostitution"  in  the  stricter 
sense  of  the  term.  I  suppose  that  it  will  require  no 
further  argument  to  convince  every  reader  that 
this  would  soon  disappear  in  a  free  society. 

Sensitive  persons,  judging  from  a  lofty  and 
morally  exalted  standpoint,  may  however  consider 
any  sex-act,  in  which  there  is  not  mutually  spon- 
taneous sexual  love,  a  degradation,  and  may  call 
it  prostitution  whenever  a  practical  economic  con- 
sideration is  the  motive  or  a  part  of  the  motive  for 
the  act. 

If  we  wish  to  consider  prostitution  in  this  broad 
sense,  then  we  must  concede  that  the  only  way  to 
eradicate  it  entirely  will  be  by  such  a  radical  change 
in  our  economic  conditions  as  will  guarantee  to 
every  man  and  ever}"  woman  a  perfect  economic 
independence.  I  do  not  think  such  a  state  of  affairs 
an  impossibility,  but  as  the  economic  question  is 
not  the  subject  of  this  treatise,  I  will  not  argue  it 
here. 


—  216  — 

I  do  claim,  however,  that  simply  the  fact  of 
freedom  from  superstition  in  the  realm  of  love  and 
sexuality  would  promptly  relieve  us  of  ninety-nine 
per  cent,  of  all  the  misery  and  corruption  which 
now  result  from  prostitution. 

In  order  to  show  the  absurdity  of  the  assump- 
tion (which  seems  to  be  almost  general  to-day), 
that  the  fact  of  prostitution  is  in  itself  the  natural 
cause  of  this  misery  and  corruption,  I  call  the  at- 
tention of  the  reader  to  the  history  of  ancient 
Greece.  Think  of  these  famous  women,  Aspasia, 
Thais,  Lamia,  Leontion,  Lais,  and  Phryne.  What 
were  they?  Merely  prostitutes,  the  same  as  the  in- 
mates of  our  brothels,  that  is  to  say,  women,  who 
set  a  certain  price  upon  the  enjoyment  of  a  night 
with  them  (an  extremely  exorbitant  price  in  some 
cases,  as  the  records  show!).  But  there  was  one 
great  difference  between  them  and  the  prostitute 
of  Christian  lands — they  were  not  despised  by  the 
public.  There  no  man  ever  thought  of  spitting  at 
and  deriding  the  woman  whom  he  had  kissed  and 
embraced  the  previous  night !  He  conversed  with 
her  upon  all  the  subjects  which  were  of  greatest  in- 
terest to  him,  his  art,  his  science,  his  political 
aspirations,  and  his  philosophical  theories,  and 
because  of  her  free  and  intimate  social  intercourse 
with  men,  the"hetaere"  was  soon  enabled  to  follow 
him  in  all  these  spheres  with  intelligent  understand- 
ing and  a  true  interest,  which  fact  greatly  enhanced 
her  value  as  a  participant  in  his  enjoyments.  As  a 
result  we  find  that  the  praise  not  only  of  the  phys- 
ical beauty  but  also  of  the  mental  ability  of  these 


—  217  — 

"prostitutes  '  was  sung  by  the  most  gifted  poets 
of  the  age,  and,  furthermore,  that  these  women 
had  a  very  important  (and  often  exceedingly  bene- 
ficient)  influence  upon  the  art  and  industry  as  well 
as  the  social  and  political  development  of  their 
country.  This  shows  us  what  free  women  can  do 
even  under  very  unfavorable  circumstances  (most 
of  these  "hetaeres"  were  released  slaves) — yes,  even 
when  they  are  forced  to  sell  their  favors! 

The  ancient  Greeks  understood  and  fully  ap- 
preciated the  value  and  beauty  of  that  natural  im- 
pulse which  draws  man  to  woman  with  irresistible 
power,  and  the  free  and  unrestrained  development 
of  this  feeling  inspired  them  in  the  creation  of  those 
sublime  works  of  art  and  science  which  even  to-day 
receive  our  admiration.  Every  student  will  admit 
that  the  brightest  pages  in  the  history  of  the  world 
are  those  which  tell  usvof  the  time  of  glory  of  an- 
cient Attica,  and  especially  of  its  center,  beautiful 
Athens.  Nowhere  else  do  we  find  such  true  refine- 
ment, such  exquisite  taste,  such  a  general  ardent 
admiration  of  real  beauty  and  nobility  —  such  ad- 
mirable proficiency  in  the  art  of  enjoying  life  as 
with  these  genial  Hellenes.  But,  lo !  the  stern  mor- 
alist will  promptly  try  to  dampen  our  enthusiasm 
with  his  gloomy  criticism.  He  will  tell  us  that  it 
was  just  this  "sinful  craving  for  enjoyment"  which 
was  to  blame  for  their  final  ruin;  that  it  was  their 
"freedom  in  love"  (or  laxity  of  morals  as  he  would 
call  it)  which  caused  the  perversions,  the  extreme 
licentiousness,  the  weakening  debaucheries,  and 
finally  resulted  in  the  degeneration  of  the  race; 


—  218  — 

that  the  Periclean  Age,  in  which  wise  and  beauti- 
ful Aspasia  greatly  assisted  in  bringing  art,  science, 
and  enjoyment  of  life  to  the  utmost  height,  also 
laid  the  foundation  for  the  "decadence."  Do  not  be 
misled  by  such  assertions!  Remember  that  this 
"freedom"  meant  only  the  freedom  of  the  selected 
few,  of  the  "privileged  class."  For  every  "free 
Athenian"  there  were  a  number  of  absolute  slaves. 
and  the  freedom  in  love  of  the  former  meant  that 
he  could  buy  the  "hetsere,"  receive  the  embrace  of 
his  wife  as  a  matter  of  course,  and  force  his  slave 
to  submission  !  Such  conditions  must  finally  cause 
demoralization  even  under  the  most  favorable  cir- 
cumstances and  in  the  best  and  noblest  of  men. 
Their  sound  and  healthy  views  on  sexuality,  their 
fine  aesthetic  feeling,  their  desire  for  a  genial  and 
jovial  enjoyment  of  life  greatly  relieved  the  odious- 
ness  of  the  relation,  so  that  we  may  well  presume 
that  their  slaves  led  a  happier  life  than  the  average 
poor  "free  citizen"  of  to-day  —  but  the  extreme 
facility  with  which  the  "free  Athenian"  could  gain 
the  satisfaction  of  all  his  natural  desires  (on  ac- 
count of  the  slavish  submission  of  others)  was 
very  liable  to  make  him  somewhat  hebetated  and 
"blase,"  and  to  cause  abnormal  desires.  There  can 
be  no  such  dangers  in  a  free  society !  The  exertion 
necessary  to  gain  the  consent  of  our  free  woman 
will  prove  to  be  very  healthy  and  invigorating, 
and  will  always  retain  a  far  greater  charm  than 
the  most  piquant  flavor  which  a  slave  could  add 
to  the  sensual  pleasures  of  her  master. 

But  the  moralist  will  further  tell  us  that  in 


many  cases  these  "hetaeres"  also  exerted  a  decid- 
edly corrupting  influence.  I  will  admit  that, 'but  the 
corrupting  influence  was  due  neither  to  the  fact  of 
prostitution  nor  to  their  "freedom;"  it  was  the 
natural  result  of  the  lack  of  freedom,  the  serfdom 
of  others.  They  were  but  few  compared  to  the  num- 
ber of  men,  the  great  majority  of  females  were  de- 
prived of  every  opportunity  for  a  fair  competition 
with  them,  for  they  were  either  regular  slaves  or 
"virtuous"  women  who,  being  strictly  confined  to 
the  narrow  limits  of  the  home  and  household,  had 
no  chance  to  acquire  true  education,  culture  and 
refinement.  This  fact  gave  to  the  few  unfair  ad- 
vantages, exceptional  power,  which,  as  we  must 
always  expect  under  such  conditions,  was  grossly 
misused  in  many  instances.  If  there  is  any  reason 
to  apprehend  any  such  calamity  in  our  free  society, 
we  must  take  due  care  that  there  are  not  too  few 
free  women  compared  to  the  number  of  free  men. 
A  radical  and  consistent  position  in  regard 
to  prostitution  is  absolutely  necessary  for  every 
woman  who  seriously  desires  the  emancipation  of 
the  sex  from  serfdom.  I  am  well  aware  that  we 
read  in  hundreds  of  essays  the  demand  :  "Woman 
must  own  her  own  body,"  but,  alas,  in  almost 
every  case  the  proud  declaration  is  almost  nullified 
by  the  attached  exceptions  and  conditions.  Gen- 
erally the  essence  of  the  further  contention  is  some- 
thing like  this :  Woman  must  own  her  body — ex- 
cept when  she  loves  a  man  (in  which  case  it  should 
belong  to  the  beloved  man,  of  course!) — and,  pro- 
vided, that  she  makes  such  use  thereof  as  the 


—  220  — 

writer  or  speaker  would  call  a  worthy  one — that 
she  does  not  "prostitute"  herself!  This,  in  my  es- 
timation, illustrates  the  weakest  point  in  the  entire 
agitation  for  woman's  rights. 

When  we  say:  "Woman  must  own  her  body," 
we  mean  what  we  sa3^,  without  reserve !  This  self- 
evidently  includes  her  inalienable  right  to  sell  her 
sexual  favors.  I  have  endeavored  to  show  you 
that  in  a  free  society  even  this  would  not  have 
that  degrading  and  corrupting  influence  which  the 
superstitious  mind  expects  as  its  inevitable  result. 

I  will  now  give  some  reasons  why  we  expect 
that  such  prostitution  would  not  happen  very 
often  in  a  free  society,  although  it  would  bring 
neither  persecution  nor  contempt.  Suppose  that 
two  women  desired  sexual  intercourse  with  a  cer- 
tain man,  one  of  them,  a  perfect  beauty,  demand- 
ing a  stipulated  price  for  her  favor  and  desiring  a 
customer;  the  other  loving  the  man  and  longing 
for  his  sexual  embrace.  Who  would  win?  I  assure 
you  that  with  99  men  out  of  100  the  first  one 
would  have  no  chance  whatever.  The  prostitute  of 
to-day,  despised,  degraded  and  corrupted  as  she  is, 
can  still  compete  quite  successfully  with  the  tyr- 
annical "better  half'  and  the  "pure"  maiden  who 
wants  a  victim  for  life;  the  courtesan  of  ancient 
Athens  found  it  quite  easy  to  outshine  the  dull 
and  ignorant  housewife  and  the  humble  slave,  but 
Phryne  herself  would  have  to  change  her  plan  of 
operation  considerably  in  order  to  be  successful  in 
a  free  society. 

Freedom  from  superstition  will  completely  re- 


—  221  — 

verse  the  ethical  view  of  prostitution.  To-day  we 
despise  the  woman  who  sells  the  favor  and  respect 
the  man  who  buys.  In  a  free  society  we  might 
criticize  the  woman  for  her  lack  of  judgment  in  the 
pursuit  of  happiness,  we  might  try  to  show  her  the 
way  to  a  greater  happiness  than  money  can  buy, 
but  we  would  have  no  real  reason  for  disrespect  or 
contempt,  because  her  action  clearly  and  unmis- 
takably shows  a  certain  value  within  herself.  As 
to  the  man — his  action  clearly  and  unmistakably 
shows  a  lack  of  value!  Notice  these  important 
points,  which  will  be  apparent  to  every  one  in  a 
tree  society:  The  fact  that  a  woman  can  sell  her 
sexual  favors  is  an  absolute  proof  that  she  could 
gain  sexual  love;  and  on  the  other  hand,  the  fact 
that  a  man  buys  sexual  favors  may  be  taken  as  a 
sure  sign  that  he  cannot  gain  sexual  love!  This 
latter  aspect  of  the  question,  once  fully  under- 
stood, would  be  perfectly  sufficient  to  relieve  us  of 
all  prostitution  in  the  stricter  sense  of  the  word. 

There  is  not  a  man  in  the  world  who  does  not 
prefer  the  loving  embrace  of  a  beloved  woman  to 
cold  submission  for  money,  and  there  is  not  a 
woman  who  desires  to  prostitute  herself — hence,  a 
legal  or  moral  law  against  the  "vice"  is  an  ab- 
surdity. Give  us  freedom  in  love  and  there  will  be 
no  more  prostitution  in  the  narrower  meaning  of 
the  word.  Then  let  us  strive  to  bring  about  such 
conditions  as  will  assure  to  every  man  and  every 
woman  economic  independence.  After  we  have 
reached  that  goal  we  may  judge  sexual  love  and 
its  degradation  from  that  lofty  poinb  of  view  which 


—  222  — 

at  present  not  a  single  person  can  claim  to  have 
attained. 

In  our  free  society  no  man  will  ever  think  of 
buying  love  (what  a  ridiculous  expression!),  but 
he  may  often  use  his  money  to  assist  him  in  gain- 
ing love — and,  so  long  as  we  must  contend  with 
this  generally  corrupting  "medium  of  exchange" 
(and  speculation !),  I  cannot  conceive  of  any  nobler 
use  for  the  "almighty  dollar." 


XXII. 
Crime  and  Disease. 


TN  this  chapter,  I  will  briefly  allude  to  a  few  points 
which  are  particularly  well  adapted  to  show  the 
value  of  the  new  theory. 

Think  of  the  innumerable  tragedies  which  the 
modern  drama,  the  thousands  of  realistic  novels, 
and.  above  all,  the  experiences  of  actual  life  reveal 
to  you,  in  which  the  terrible  outcome  seems  but  the 
inevitable  result  of  the  complications;  apply  the 
new  theory  to  each  case,  that  is,  imagine  that  the 
respective  men  and  women  had  freed  themselves 
from  superstition  and  had  accepted  the  new  love- 
ideal — and  you  will  have  to  admit  that  this  would 
in  almost  every  instance  change  the  gloomy  trag- 
edy into  a  joyful  comedy ! 

Study  for  a  week  or  two  the  reports  of  crimes 
given  in  any  one  of  our  great  dailies  and  the  re- 
ports of  a  criminal  court,  and  observe  in  how  many 
cases  the  crime  is  obviously  the  direct  result  of 
superstition  and  the  ensuing  unnatural  restraint 
in  the  sex-life  of  human  beings,  and  in  how  many 
of  the  remaining  cases  the  traged}7  may  be  easily 
traced  to  the  same  cause. 


-    224:     - 

Think  of  the  so-called  slum-districts  of  our 
large  cities  with  their  thousands  of  children,  of 
whom  we  can  reasonably  expect  only  that  they 
will  become  bitter  enemies  of  human  society. 

Study  the  character  of  those  men  and  women 
in  your  immediate  surroundings  whom  you  call 
bad,  and  investigate  as  to  the  original  causes  of 
their  depravity. 

Think  of  the  fact  that  almost  every  youth 
comes  to  that  terrible  crossing  point  from  whence 
every  road  leads  to  either  misery  or  degradation. 

Then  you  will  get  some  idea  of  how  immensely 
crimes  would  be  diminished  by  freedom  in  this 
sphere. 

The  effect  would  be  equally  advantageous  in 
regard  to  diseases.  I  will  here  name  but  a  few 
points,  which  are  so  plain  that  they  will  have  to 
be  admitted  by  every  sane  person : 

1.  In  a  free  society  every  child  would  self- 
evidently  be  the  result  of  sexual  preference  (elective 
affinit3^)  and  we  all  know  the  vital  importance  of 
this  in  securing  a  physically  and  mentally  healthy 
progeny.  What  are  the  conditions  to-day  in  regard 
to  this?  So  far  as  the  "children 'of  love"  (those 
born  out  of  wedlock)  are  concerned,  they  generally 
receive  such  miserable  treatment  from  the  first  day 
of  their  existence  in  the  womb  that  the  good  effect 
of  a  proper  beginning  is  soon  annihilated,  while  as 
to  the  marriages  of  to-day,  nobody  will  claim  that 
more  than  one-half  of  them  are  love-matches,  and 
in  many  of  these  latter  the  love  is  merely  "spir- 
itual" and  results  in  sexual  mismating.  Hence,  we 


—  225  — 

find  real  sexual  5ove  only  in  the  minority  of  unions. 
The  worst  of  all,  however,  is  this:  Even  under  ex- 
ceptionally favorable  conditions  we  are  not  at  all 
sure,  (thanks  to  that  grand  institution  of  "living 
together")  that  the  issue  will  not  happen  to  be  the 
result  of  a  rather  dull  and  indifferent  sexual  em- 
brace fas  "custom"  may  cause  it  even  between  pas- 
sionate lovers  iii  their  honey-moon),  and  that  fur- 
thpr  issues  in  after  years  will  not  be  weak  and 
crippled  ••children  of  duty !''  Of  late  we  hear  a  great 
deal  about  "laws  of  heredity,"  "scientific  prop- 
agation," etc.,  but  the  suggestions  and  advice  un- 
der these  headings  must  sound  like  the  bitterest 
irony  to  the  great  mass  of  men  and  women  of  to- 
day. To  the  "moral"  person,  yes,  even  to  every  "ex- 
clusivist"  Free-Lover  they  are  practically  worth- 
less. In  a  free  society,  however,  the  people  will  pay 
considerable  attention  to  these  subjects,  and  as 
they  will  have  the  chance  to  make  the  best  possible 
use  of  their  knowledge,  we  may  expect  grand  re- 
sults. 

2.  In  the  foregoing  I  have  shown  that  compar- 
atively few  human  beings  get  what  might  be  termed 
a  "fair  start"  in  their  existence.  Of  these  fortunate 
ones  many  are  seriously  hampered  in  their  growth. 
Superstitions  hinder  the  pregnant  woman  from 
leading  such  a  life  as  would  be  most  conducive  to 
the  healthy  and  beautiful  development  of  her  child, 
and  poverty  often  renders  any  decent  nutrition 
and  education,  absolutely  unattainable.  In  a  free 
society  there  would  be  no  conception  except  where 
the  conditions  appeared  favorable,  i.  e.,  where  there 


—  226  — 

was  a  fair  guarantee  that  the  child  would  be  well 
conceived,  and  well  cared  for  from  the  beginning  of 
its  existence  to  its  independence. 

3.  In  spite  of  the  decidedly  poor  chances,  we 
still  see  a  number  of  children  develop  into  youths 

^•and  maidens  who  are  strong  and  healthy  in  body 
and  mind,  but  after  maturity  superstition  again 
throws  a  large  percentage  of  these  into  the  ranks 
of  the  diseased.  I  have  explained  this  in  previous 
chapters,  but  I  failed  to  call  attention  to  the  fact 
that  ignorance  on  sexual  subjects  adds  a  great 
deal  to  the  dangers.  What  I  said  about  scientific 
propagation  is  equally  true  of  sexual  hygiene  in 
general.  Very  few  people  know  anything  about 
either,  and  the  great  majority  of  these  few  are  in 
about  the  same  position  that  the  patient  was  for 
whom  the  physician  prescribed  an  O3rster  stew  and 
a  bottle  of  Bordeaux,  while  the  sufferer  hardly 
knew  where  to  get  a  piece  of  bread  for  the  next 
day.  In  a  free  society  sexual  hygiene  will  be  appre- 
ciated, and  you  may  rest  assured  that  there  every 
youth  and  maiden  will  receive  intelligent  advice 
how  to  lead  a  healthy  and  happy  sex-life  and— 
what  is  more  important,  will  be  able  to  act  accord- 
ingly. 

4.  Everjr  physician  can  tell  you  that  very  many 
ailments  and  diseases  are  horribly  neglected  and 
maltreated  on  account  of  a  false  sense  of  shame. 
In  a  free  society  sexual  diseases  would  receive  the 
same  care  and  attention  and  would  be  spoken  of 
as  unrestrainedly  as  are  other  diseases. 

5     You  have  all  heard  of  the  appalling  fre- 


—  227  — 

quency  of  abortion  and  the  use  of  dangerous  drugs 
for  this  purpose  (with  which  thousands  of  women 
annually  ruin  their  constitutions),  and  you  all 
know  that  freedom  from  superstition  would  relieve 
us  of  this  evil. 

6.  Last  but  not  least,  I  call  attention  to  those 
great  evils,  contagious  venereal  diseases,  and  espe- 
cially to  their  most  formidable  kind,  syphilis.  What 
horrible  pictures  of  misery  and  degeneration  these 
diseases  present  to  us  now!  Secretly  and  insidiously, 
they  sneak  in  everywhere;  it  seems  impossible  to 
arrest  their  growth  and  extension  ;  in  many  thou- 
sands of  cases  they  are  horribly  neglected,  and 
their  poison  is  transmitted  to  children  and  grand- 
children. Of  all  the  pests  which  torture  humankind 
these  venereal  diseases  are  declared  by  many  to  be 
the  most  malignant,  the  greatest  curses !  And  yet 
the  truth  is  that  of  all  the  serious  contagious  dis- 
ea.ses  they  are  the  lenst  malignant.  They  do  not 
come  to  us  in  any  mysterious  manner  through  the 
air  or  through  the  water,  they  are  transmissable 
only  by  direct  contact,  they  are  easily  recognized, 
may  be  easily  prevented,  and  can  in  almost  all  cases 
be  easily  cured  if  properly  attended  to  Tn  their  first 
stages.  Our  "moralists"' make  this  impossible  how- 
ever, yes,  they  seem  to  feel  a  great  deal  of  malig- 
nant joy  over  the  fact  that  a  "just  God"  or  a 
"revengeful  Nature"  has  created  such  an  excellent 
punishment  for  the  "sins  of  the  flesh !"  Their  mean 
and  menacing  position  regarding  these  diseases 
should  suffice  to  lead  any  humane  thinker  to  reject 
with  disgust  their  so-called  morality. 


—  228  — 

What  we  need  for  a  prompt  arrest  and  a  com- 
plete extermination  of  the  evil  is  simply  this:  Ra- 
tional treatment ;  prevention  of  infection,  and  pre- 
vention of  transmission  to  the  next  generation. 
The  present  moral  code  makes  each  one  of  these 
steps  an  impossibility,  while  in  a  free  society  they 
would  inevitably  be  taken.  Do  you  doubt  the  pos- 
sibility of  this  reform  ?  Do  you  still  think  that  you 
are  pure  and  noble  but  that  others  are  so  depra  ved 
that  they  would  find  joy  and  satisfaction  in  infect- 
ing their  fellow-beings  with  dangerous  diseases? 
Then,  I  would  tell  you  that  you  have  still  the 
greatest  of  all  superstitions  to  overcome.  Mean- 
while, however,  I  will  give  you  some  practical 
reasons  for  my  assertion :  Why  is  it  that  men  and 
women  appear  so  terribly  unscrupulous  to-day  in 
carrying  this  poison  to  one  or  many  of  their  fellow- 
beings  and  transmitting  it  even  to  their  own  chil- 
dren? I  claim  that  in  every  case  it  is  due  either  to 
ignorance,  or  to  the  fact  that  to  be  conscientious 
in  this  respect  means  a  terrible  sacrifice  of  self.  The 
man  or  woman  of  the  present  moral  society,  who 
has  been  so  unfortunate  as  to  inherit  or  to  con- 
tract a  chronic,  contagious  venereal  disease,  must 
argue  thus :  If  I  manage  to  conceal  the  fact  (which 
the  general  "sense  of  shame"  makes  extremely 
easy),  then  I  can  enjoy  all  kinds  of  love  and  finally 
win  one  of  the  most  worthy  and  beautiful  of  human 
beings  for  a  life-companion  and  sexual  mate,  while 
if  I  am  conscientious  I  must  give  up  forever  all 
that  makes  life  worth  living  and  by  confessing  the 
truth  brand  myself  as  an  outcast  from  human 


—  229  — 

society.  Which  course  is  he  or  she  most  likely  to 
take  ? 

In  a  free  society  the  condition  \voulcl  be  com- 
pletely reversed.  Syphilitic  men  and  women,  al- 
though openly  and  truthfully  acknowledging  their 
ailment,  could  fully  enjoy  all  the  pleasures  of  love 
and  friendship,  to  which  their  worth  and  capacity 
entitled  them  (not  excluding  sexual  intercourse 
either),  while  to  conceal  their  condition  and  will- 
fully infect  others  with  their  disease  would  be  the 
superlative  of  meanness  and  the  surest  way  of 
spoiling  their  chances  for  obtaining  any  future 
happiness,  as  no  false  sense  of  shame  would  shield 
them  there. 

I  hope  that  those  readers  who  still  insist  upon 
believing  in  the  "innate  depravity"  of  main'  of  our 
fellow  beings  will  at  least  admit  that  even  the 
most  depraved  of  them  may  be  expected  to  be 
"conscientious"  where  conscientiousness  pays  best! 

In  conclusion,  I  will  say  that  that  self-evident 
result,  the  diminishing  of  crime  and  disease  in  hu- 
man society,  ought  to  be  in  itself  a  sufficient  reason 
for  every  humane  Freethinker  to  accept  with  en- 
thusiasm the  theory  of  sexual  freedom. 


XXIII. 
Ebriosity. 

AN  APPEAL  TO  THE  WOMEN. 


T  SUPPOSE  that  many  of  you  have  often  \von- 
derered  what  it  is  that  gives  such  a  peculiar, 
mysterious  charm  to  the  inebriating  cup,  whereby 
so  many  of  the  so-called  stronger  sex  are  reduced 
so  often  to  extremely  weak  mortals.  As  it  \vill  be 
our  principle  henceforth  not  to  keep  any  secrets 
from  you,  dear  ladies,  and  as  I  hope  that  it  may 
cause  you- to  judge  your  weak  brethren  a  trifle  less 
severely,  I  will  initiate  you  into  the  mysteries. 

For  a  great  number  of  men  (from  the  most  in- 
telligent and  refined  to  the  most  vulgar  classes) 
the  "grandest  moments"  of  their  lives,  affording 
the  highest  enjoyment  possible  to  them,  are  those 
which  are  spent  in  extravagant  drinking-bouts.  As- 
sociated with  sympathizing  comrades  and  friends 
(and  fellow-sufferers  perhaps)  they  submit  to  the 
intoxicating  influence  of  the  strong  beverage  be- 
cause this  alone  can  deliver  them  from  a  legion  of 


—  231  — 

paltry  scruples  which  cramp  and  oppress  them  in 
€  very-day  life;  for  a  few  jolly  hours  they  can  give 
free  vent  to  their  inmost  thoughts  and  feelings  be- 
cause intoxication  has  freed  them  from  the  dread 
of  the  criticizing,  censuring  philistines,  from  the 
fear  of  giving  offense  or  of  being  misunderstood. 
This  is  what  leads  thousands  again  and  again  to 
excessive  drinking.  Treacherous  and  fickle  though 
it  may  be,  the  inebriating  cup  is  undeniably  a  kind 
of  "liberator !'?  Many  valuable  talents  need  it  for 
the  full  development  of  their  genius,  because  it 
frees  them  temporarily  from  many  little  scruples 
and  weaknesses;  to  many  it  gives  the  only  op- 
portunity to  revel  in  enthusiastic  poetical  feelings, 
which  seem  utterly  out  of  place  in  the  dreary,  prac- 
tical, and  prosaic  world  of  to-day;  for  many  it  is 
the  only  means  of  bringing  joy,  as  no  other  power 
can  remove  the  dark  barriers  and  open  the  way 
for  the  longed-for  "lightheartedness:"  while,  alas, 
many  crave  for  it  for  no  other  reason  than  that  it 
delivers  them ,  for  a  short  time  at  least,  from  dreary 
thoughts,  from  anguish  and  despair.  That  drunk- 
enness, especially  in  the  poorer  classes,  offers  you 
so  many  ugly  pictures  of  stupidity,  vulgarity,  and 
depravity,  shows  very  clearly  that  the  lives  of 
these  persons  have  been  deprived  so  completely  of 
all  poetic  beauty  that  even  the  dream-like  condi- 
tion of  intoxication  cannot  conjure  any  delightful 
visions  to  their  minds,  that  the  only  desire  is  to 
benumb,  to  forget,  or  to  gain  courage  to  show  to 
this  miserable  world  with  scornful  laughter  the 
contempt  which  they  must  feel  for  it. 


932  — 

You  tell  me  that  it  is  pernicious,  depraving, 
unworthy  of  a  gentleman,  to  get  drunk.  You  may 
be  right.  Well,  then  do  as  the  intelligent  physician 
would  do,  search  for  the  causes  and  try  to  remove 
them.  See  to  it  that  human  life  shall  appear  full  of 
poetic  beauty  even  to  the  sober  man  — and  what 
could  be  better  adapted  for  this  than  love?  Exert 
yourselves  to  bring  about  such  conditions  that 
henceforth  not  a  single  human  being's  existence 
shall  contain  so  much  bitter  pain  and  hopeless 
misery  and  be  so  destitute  of  pleasures  and  joys 
that  he  shall  crave  for  the  Lethe  which  brings 
oblivion.  Sexual  freedom  will  render  powerful  as- 
sistance in  this.  Think  of  it,  how  often  the  craving 
for  excessive  drinking  is  caused  by  a  loveless  life, 
by  marital  misery,  family  troubles  (many  unde- 
sired  children,  etc.),  by  the  brothels — and  further- 
more by  the  fact  that  the  saloon  is  the  only  place 
for  a  great  number  where  they  can  talk  and  hear 
about  things  which  are  of  great  interest  to  them 
and  which  are  "tabooed"  in  "good"  society. 

Imagine  all  of  your  drunkards  transferred  to 
a  free  society  and  ask  yourself  the  question  what 
effect  that  would  have  upon  them.  In  your  society 
some  of  them  had  "faithful"  wives,  who  furnished 
them  sexual  gratification  upon  demand  (very  often 
with  a  feeling  of  loathing  and  disgust,  so  that  a 
number  of  diseased,  stupid  or  idiotic  children  re- 
sulted therefrom — they  did  their  "duty, "they  were 
obedient !) — others  bought  for  a  few  dollars  a  beau- 
tiful young  woman  whenever  they  were  in  need  of 
one,  and  a  third  class  knew  nothing  but  stupid 


self-abuse.  With  us  the  longing  for  love  will  soon 
be  aroused  in  all  of  them,  but  in  such  a  condition 
as  they  are  now  they  will  not  be  able  to  win  the 
affection  of  a  woman.  They  may  drink  whatever 
they  like  and  as  much  as  they  like,  but  the  power- 
ful impulse  which  draws  man  to  woman  will  force 
them  always  to  appear  worthy  of  love — and  remem- 
ber, there  is  no  end  to  this  wooing.  This  will  prove 
to  be  an  infallible  remedy,  compared  with  which  all 
the  compulsion  which  you  can  imagine,  as  well  as 
jour  " Keel ey -cure,"  are  but  miserable  palliatives. 

In  speaking  of  intoxication  in  the  foregoing,  I 
thought  only  of  those  men  to  whom  the  drinking 
of  spirituous  beverages  does  not  appear  as  an 
offense  or  misdemeanor.  The  spectacle  becomes  far 
more  gloomy  where  tyranny  has  extended  its  perni- 
cious work  even  to  this  sphere. 

Poor  Yankee  boy,  whom  a  loving  mother  has 
anxiously  guarded  from  the  knowledge  of  any  in- 
toxicating beverage  until  you  have  reached  man- 
hood, who  has  been  taught  that  it  is  a  sin,  yes,  a 
crime  to  touch  a  drop  of  liquor!  a  physical  need 
(inherited  perhaps),  a  moment  of  weakness,  the 
irresistible  invitation  of  a  friend,  or  other  sufficient 
cause,  has  led  you  to  take  a  small  glass  of  the 
strong  liquor.  Your  system  being  unaccustomed 
to  the  intoxicant,  it  has  a  wonderful  effect-it  causes 
you  a  pleasant  sensation,  a  lusty  thrill.  Seeing  that 
you  have  sinned  anyway  a  little  more  or  less  will 
not  make  any  great  difference!  One  glass  follows 
the  other.  Eesult:  Terrible  "blues,"  bitter  self- 
reproach  and  the  firm  resolve  to  guard  against  the 


sin  in  future.  But,  alas,  the  forbidden  fruit  will  for- 
ever be  the  most  tempting.  The  artificially  sup- 
pressed craving  increases  with  every  day.  Being- 
conscious  of  a  craving  for  "evil,"  for  "sin,"  you 
lose  your  self-respect  and  with  that  the  courage 
and  the  power  of  resistance.  You  sin  again  and 
again.  Very  soon  you  must  drink,  drink,  if  for  no 
other  object  than  to  benumb  the  tortures  of  con- 
science— and  six  months  later  you  are  but  a  mis- 
erable ruin  of  your  former  self.  Diseased  in  body 
and  mind,  without  the  last  vestige  of  your  former 
virility  and  buoyancy,  devoured  by  all  kinds  of  de- 
bauchery, with  a  look  of  perfect  idiocy  in  your  eyes 
you  stagger  into  the  arms  of  the  horrified  mother. 
And  his  mother?  She  will  promptly  curse  the  "vile 
stuff"  which  has  made  such  a  wreck  of  her  once 
healthy  and  noble  boy.  She  will  curse  the  saloon- 
keeper, she  will  curse  the  weak  men  for  not  ridding 
the  world  of  this  "dangerous  enemy."  And  finally 
in  her  mad  despair  she  will  call  upon  all  mothers, 
all  maidens,  to  unite  with  her  in  the  attempt  to 
demolish  every  distillery,  every  brewery,  yes,  every 
vineyard  in  order  to  prevent  weak  men  from  sin- 
ning ! 

Poor  deluded  mother!  Look  at  yonder  white- 
haired  man,  who  is  still  so  hard  at  work  at  his 
daily  task,  while  he  sings  a  gay  song  and  greets 
you  with  laughing  eyes.  Let  me  tell  you  that  this 
man  has  since  the  third  year  of  his  life  tasted  this 
"vile  stuff"  almost  every  day,  yes,  he  has  often 
taken  "too  much"  of  it  even  — and  yet,  although 
70  years  old,  he  is  far  from  being  a  ruin.  Should 


—  235  — 

this  not  lead  you  to  the  thought  that  it  was  not  the 
"Adleness"  of  the  "stuff"  which  has  ruined  the  life 
of  your  boy,  but  that  it  was  your  superficial  judg- 
ment, your  tyrannical  "Thou  shalt!"  and  "Thou 
shalt  not!"  which  Las  caused  all  of  the  harm? 
Study  human  nature  before  you  judge  and  con- 
demn. If  then  you  still  have  the  conviction  that 
spirituous  beverages  are  not  in  any  way  necessary 
for  the  healthiest  and  happiest  life  of  any  human 
being,  then  exert  your  energy  to  remove  all  that 
which  causes  the  longing  for  such  stimulants.  If 
you  find,  however,  that  this  is  not  possible  at  pres- 
ent, then  teach  3*our  son  to  control  the  impulse  as 
a  free,  strong,  and  courageous  man,  yielding  to  it 
wherever  it  will  bring  joy  to  him  and  others  with- 
out doing  harm,  and  controlling  it  wherever  it 
may  endanger  his  manly  dignity.  It  is  always  ex- 
tremely dangerous  to  preach,  Beware  of  tempta- 
tion! and  there  is  but  one  kind  of  defense  which  is 
still  more  absurd,  and  that  is  the  attempt  to  shield 
your  protege  from  temptation  by  compulsion.  A 
weak  impulse,  which  may  be  perfectly  natural,  is 
thereby  increased  to  a  morbid  craving,  and  the 
teaching  that  any  indulgence  is  a  great  sin  or  a 
crime  has  no  other  effect  than  that  one  weak  mom- 
ent robs  the  young  man  of  the  most  important 
requisite  for  a  manly  control  of  the  impulse,  self- 
esteem  and  self-reliance. 

"A  poor  deluded  mother"  I  called  this  woman, 
and  I  am  confident  that  many  of  you  will  promptly 
agree  with  me  in  this,  but,  dear  ladies,  have  you 
not  acted  in  an  equally  silly,  absurd  and  tyrannical 


—  236  — 

manner  in  regard  to  another  enjoyment,  which 
certainly  is  absolutely  necessary  for  a  healthy  and 
happy  life,  in  regard  to  an  impulse  which  the  his- 
tory of  humankind  has  proved  to  be  ineradicable? 

Of  our  saloons,  I  will  say  that  the  same  prin- 
ciple holds  good  in  regard  to  them  as  does  in  the 
case  of  any  class  of  human  beings:  The  more  you 
despise  them  the  more  despicable  they  will  become. 
In  those  temperance  places  where  the  saloon  is 
considered  a  "den  of  vice"  it  generally  comes  pretty 
near  to  deserving  that  title.  In  those  cities,  how- 
ever, in  which  the  sale  of  liquor  is  considered  just 
as  honorable  a  business  as  any  other,  you  will  find 
most  of  the  saloons  to  be  bright  and  cheerful 
places,  where  there  is  good  company  and  where 
you  may  take  your  lady  friend  without  danger  of 
causing  her  any  great  embarrassment,  and  i-n  the 
free  society  the  public  amusement  hall  will  often  be 
the  grandest  and  most  beautiful  building  in  the 
city. 

I  believe  that  every  gentleman  will  promptly 
agree  with  me  when  I  say  that  even  in  our  j oiliest 
drinking-bouts  the  presence  of  the  opposite  sex 
might  greatly  enhance  the  enjoyment.  But  they 
would  have  to  be  free  and  proud  women.  Where 
can  we  find  them?  Here  is  "sweet  innocence,"  who 
tremblingly  shrinks  from  any  ardent  look,  from 
any  passionate  word  of  love  as  from  a  terrible 
ghost;  here  is  another  woman,  who  coolly  cal- 
culates how  many  dollars  it  may  bring  to  her,  and 
all  others  are  merely  slaves,  each  one  of  whom  has 
her  owner,  be  it  for  life  or  through  a  limited  con- 


—  237  — 

tract  "on  time."  I  am  well  aware  that  many  of 
these  slaves  are  very  willing  to  "sin  in  secrecy,"  to 
cheat  their  "masters"  here  and  there,  but  that 
does  not  make  them  any  freer;  in  society  they  are 
generally  the  most  reserved  and  often  appear  as 
the  most  enthusiastic  admirers  of  "virtue."  In  vain 
we  would  look  for  free  women,  and  so  it  is  but  nat- 
ural that  we  should  often  desire  to  withdraw  to  the 
exclusive  society  of  men  for  our  most  exuberant 
social  enjoyments  and  especially  when  we  wish  to 
do  homage  to  the  Gods,  Bacchus  and  Gambrinus. 
That  such  hilarity  is  so  extremely  liable  to  turn 
into  vulgarity  is  due  to  the  fact  that  the  ennobling 
influence  of  love  is  missing. 

In  a  free  society  there  \vill  be  no  reason  to  ex- 
clude women  from  any  .social  enjoyment,  and  where 
free  men  and  women  gather  for  such  a  purpose  they 
may  venture  without  any  danger  to  indulge  in,  a 
"nobler"  juice  than  that  of  the  lemon.  Their  gen- 
uine sense  of  shame  will  keep  them  from  vulgarity 
and  from  all  actions  which  would  appear  odious 
or  non-cvsthetic.  As  neither  gold  nor  law  nor  vows 
of  love  can  secure  them  the  possession  of  a  human 
being,  their  everlasting  desire  for  harmonious  as- 
sociation will  force  them  forward  with  magic  power 
in  the  constant  striving  to  appear  worthy  of  love ! 

I  do  not  claim  to  know  whether  the  consump- 
tion of  spirituous  liquors  would  be  decreased  in  a 
free  society,  but  I  do  know  that  the  ennobling  in- 
fluence of  Free  Love  would  promptly  become  ap- 
parent in  this  sphere  as  in  all  others.  In  regard  to 
temperance,  I  would  say  that  it  is  mainly  a  ques- 


—  2.38  — 

tion  of  hygiene.  The  arguments  advanced  by  our 
Prohibitionists  and  "Teetotalers"  are  so  extremely 
superficial  so  far  that  I  consider  them  absolutely 
valueless.  I  expect  a  more  intelligent  treatment  of 
the  subject  from  free  men  and  women. 

My  personal  experiences  in  this  and  the  old 
country  have  given  me  the  conviction  that  even  in 
the  Golden  Age  to  come  many  a  free  man  will  agree 
with  Martin  Luther's  maxim  that  the  man 

Who  loves  not  woman,  wine  and  song, 
Bemains  a  fool  his  whole  life  long ! 


XXIV. 
Woman's  Emancipation. 


T  AM  a  Freethinker,  but  I  did  not  consider  it  ne- 
cessary  in  this  treatise  to  point  out  the  "Mis- 
takes of  Moses,"  the  inconsistencies  of  the  Bible, 
and  so  forth,  to  substantiate  my  position  toward 
the  Christian  religion,  because  this  has  been  done 
in  a  perfectly  satisfactory  manner  by  many  others. 
I  am  strongly  in  favor  of  woman's  emancipa- 
tion; I  hold  that  the  female  sex  is  as  important  to 
and  as  useful  in  human  society  as  is  the  male  sex; 
that  there  is  not  a  single  right  or  privilege  of  the 
individual  to  which  woman  is  not  entitled  as  much 
as  is  man,  but  I  would  consider  it  a  useless  waste 
of  time  to  argue  the  point,  to  prove  that  woman  is 
not  an  inferior  being,  that  she  is  no  more  a  weak 
creature  requiring  leading-strings  than  is  man. 
Hundreds  of  intelligent  women  and  a  great  num- 
ber of  men  have  substantiated  this  position  by 
arguments  which  are  as  plain  and  irrefutable  as 
the  witty  criticisms  of  the  Bible  with  which  the 
great  Colonel  causes  our  ministers  of  the  gospel  so 
much  trouble  and  heart-ache. 


—  240  — 

I  claim  that  both  of  these  questions,  Free- 
thought  vs.  Religion  and  Woman's  Emancipation 
vs.  Woman's  Subordination,  have  been  so  thor- 
oughly ventilated  in  modern  literature  that  any 
person  of  fair  intelligence  must  reach  my  viewpoint 
as  just  stated  if  he  really  wants  the  truth!  But, 
alas!  many  do  not  want  the  truth,  because  they 
are  afraid  of  it.  That  Freethought  as  well  as 
Woman's  Emancipation  still  meets  with  such  a 
general  opposition  is  not  due  so  much  to  a  lack 
of  intellectual  capacity  in  the  masses  as  to  the  fact 
that  neither  one  of  these  new  theories  has  been  able 
so  far  to  prove  that  it  makes  men  and  women  bet- 
ter and  happier  beings.  I  have  stated  already  why 
the  Freethinkers  cannot  furnish  this  proof,  and  I 
will  now  try  to  show  why  the  Woman  emancipators' 
cause  labors  under  the  same  disadvantage.  They 
have  rejected  with  scorn  and  disgust  that  part  of 
the  Christian  dogma  which  preaches  the  slavish 
submission  of  woman  to  man,  but  they  have  re- 
tained the  most  important  part  of  the  supersti- 
tions in  regard  to  love-  and  sex-life  which  we  have 
inherited  from  religion ;  they  are  striving  for  equal 
rights  with  man  in  the  fields  of  politics,  art,  science, 
industry  and  commerce,  but  they  neglect  the  most 
important  feature,  sexual  freedom  ;  many  of  them 
go  so  far  as  to  denounce  Christian  marriage,  but 
when  one  of  their  women  falls  in  love  with  a  man 
she  promptly  craves  the  same  old  mutual  pos- 
session which  is  so  sure  to  make  a  master  of  the 
stronger  and  a  slave  of  the  weaker  owner.  These 
half-measures  and  inconsistencies  have  placed  the 


—  241  — 

emancipated  woman  in  such  an  unnatural  and  un- 
healthful  position  that  the  conservative  observer 
must  feel  that  she  has  paid  too  dearly  for  her  lib- 
erties. So  far  as  economic  and  political  emancipa- 
tion are  concerned,  we  can  claim  with  just  pride 
that  the  energetic  work  of  our  high-spirited,  cour- 
ageous American  women  has  effected  the  result 
that  there  is  not  another  country  in  the  world 
which  is  so  far  advanced  in  these  respects  as  is  the 
I'nited  States.  But  if  the  question  were  asked,  Has 
this  made  them  any  happier  or  has  it  increased  the 
happiness  of  others?  we  would  have  to  answer, 
Xo! — and,  furthermore,  if  we  were  asked,  Has  not 
this  had  the  tendency  to  make  them  unwomanly? 
—then  I,  for  one,  would  unhesitatingly  answer.  Yes ! 
that  is  the  inevitable  result  of  the  unnatural  con- 
dition. For  a  woman  who  wishes  to  study  law, 
medicine  or  any  other  science,  or  who  desires  to 
become  a  public  agitator  in  politics  or  sociology, 
free  and  unrestrained  social  intercourse  with  men 
is  an  absolute  necessity.  For  the  ordinary  "weak'' 
woman  such  free  and  unrestrained  intercourse 
brings  great  danger  for  her  "virtue"  and  "mor- 
ality ;"  our  emancipated  woman  wishes  to  remain 
virtuous  and  moral  and  so  she  must  exert  herself 
to  the  utmost  so  persistently  to  suppress  her  nat- 
ural impulse,  that  finally  she  will  be  able  to  remain 
perfectly  cool  and  indifferent  in  the  most  intimate 
intercourse  with  the  opposite  sex.  And  if,  in  spite 
of  this,  she  falls  in  love  with  a  man  whom  she  con- 
siders her  "true  mate"  and  who  is  willing  to  offer 
her  his. "ex elusive"  love,  she  instinctively  feels  that 


—  242  — 

even  then  she  must  cautiously  guard  her  feelings 
from  becoming  too  passionate,  as  that  would 
greatly  endanger  her  ''independence"  in  the  result- 
ing relation.  Everywhere  she  is  obliged  to  suppress 
her  sex-nature  in  order  to  gain  the  desired  goal; 
again  and  again  it  appears  to  her  that  the  sexual 
impulse  (which  gives  pleasure  only  to  mail  while  it 
brings  serious  duties  and  hard  work  to  woman)  is 
the  greatest  enemy  of  woman's  emancipation;  she 
curses  the  sensual  man  who  leads  her  into  tempta- 
tion, and  demands  of  the  women  that  they  fortify 
themselves  by  "purity"  and  "elevate"  the  sensual 
men  to  that  lofty  condition  in  which  they  also  can 
be  cool  and  indifferent  in  the  physical  proximity 
of  the  opposite  sex.  And  what  does  all  this  ter- 
rible effort  mean?  It  means  to  exert  yourself  to 
make  man  unmanly  and  woman  unwomanly!  As 
a  healthy  sexual  impulse  is  necessary  for  true  man- 
liness, so  it  is  equally  necessary  for  true  woman- 
liness. 

For  the  free  woman  of  this  country  the  Wom- 
an's Question  has  virtually  ceased  to  exist.  As  to 
the  condition  of  the  married  woman,  that  does  not 
affect  her,  as  she  does  not  intend  to  marry,  and  the 
unmarried  woman  in  the  United  States  has  as  much 
•economic  independence  as  the  average  manges,  in 
many  respects  her  economic  chances  are  even  bet- 
ter. It  is  true  that  the  woman  has  not  so  much 
chance  of  gaining  a  political  office  and  that  in 
many  branches  her  wages  for  the  same  work  are 
still  lower  than  those  of  men,  but  this  is  more  than 
counterbalanced  by  the  facts  that  custom  makes 


—  243  — 

"living"  considerably  cheaper  for  a  woman  than 
for  a  man,  and  that  in  one  great  and  important 
occupation,  for  which  women  are  specially  adapted, 
i.  e.,  housekeeping  and  '''home-making,"  there  is 
comparatively  the  least  competition.  It  is  ridicul- 
ousty  absurd,  of  course,  to  claim  that  this  latter 
should  be  woman's  only  vocation,  but  the  views  of 
many  "w  omens-rights-women"  are  just  as  absurd. 
The  latter  seem  to  labor  under  the  queer  supersti- 
tion that  there  is  something  particularly  degrading 
and  enslaving  about  this  kind  of  work.  It  is  not 
the  work  which  is  degrading— the  degradation  con- 
sists only  in  the  slavish  conditions  under  which  it 
is  generally  performed.  After  women  have  once 
come  to  understand  that  to  do  this  work  need  not 
necessarily  be  the  self-evident  duty  resulting  from 
the  affirmation,  "I  love  you,"  that  it  should  be 
treated  the  same  as  any  other  vocation,  then  they 
will  also  realize  that  this  represents  an  ability  in 
woman  ("house-keeping"  and  "home-making,"  par- 
ticularly the  latter)  which  gives  them  a  decided 
economic  advantage  over  men.  I  would  certainly 
advise  every  free  woman,  who  is  in  the  least  in- 
clined to  such  work,  to  pay  some  attention  to  the 
development  of  her  faculties  of  this  kind.  Experience 
has  shown  that  this  need  not  materially  interfere 
with  her  aims  in  other  directions,  and  it  may  prove 
a  valuable  economic  safeguard  at  some  future  time. 
It  is  often  claimed  that  a  grave  objection  to  so- 
called  housework  consists  in  the  fact  that  it  gen- 
erally requires  too  many  hours  per  day.  Any  voca- 
tion which  forces  you  to  work  12  to  14  hours  per 


—  244  — 

day  is  of  course  enslaving  and  depraving,  but  I 
could  not  imagine  a  strike  in  which  I  would  place 
so  much  faith  as  in  an  ' 'eight-hour-movement"  of 
good  housekeepers,  duly  associated.  "Scabs"  would 
not  have  half  the  chance  there  as  in  other  strikes. 
For  the  emancipation  of  woman  it  was  of  the  ut- 
most importance  that  all  fields  of  art,  science,  and 
industry  should  be  opened  to  her,  but  after  "home- 
making"  ceases  to  be  her  "ordained"  duty  it  may 
become  one  of  her  greatest  strongholds. 

Well,  our  free  woman  will  feel  that  she  needs 
a  great  deal  of  emancipation  yet,  that  there  is  still 
a  heavy  burden  of  slavery  and  unjust  servitude 
from  which  she  should  be  released,  but  she  will  al.so 
feel  that  in  each  and  every  case  her  brother,  man, 
needs  exactly  the  same  emancipation.  She  will  scorn 
the  idea  of  a  fight  of  women  against  men,  but  she 
\vill  enter  with  courage  and  enthusiasm  into  the 
fight  of  free  men  and  women  against  tyrants  of 
either  sex  or  any  creed  —  and  I  am  afraid  that  she 
will  find  the  worst  tyrants  and  the  greatest  num- 
ber of  them  within  the  pale  of  her  own  sex.  Whether 
she  be  sexually  weak  or  strong  she  will  not  be 
afraid  of  the  "sensuality"  in  any  man.  If  he  is  un- 
sympathetic to  her,  it  will  be  an  extremely  easy 
task  to  ward  him  off.  If  she  finds  him  to  be  con- 
genial she  will  greatly  enjoy  his  wooing  and  may 
find  intense  pleasure  in  his  physical  proximity  even 
when  she  has  no  desire  for  the  sexual  embrace.  If 
she  does  not  desire  the  latter,  there  is  no  reason 
why  she  shall  submit,  while  if  she  does  crave  it, 
there  is  no  reason  why  she  shall  not  add  the  phys« 


ical  enjoyment  to  the  spiritual  pleasures.  Being 
thus  free  from  superstition  she  will  never  be  afraid 
of  love,  no  matter  in  what  form  it  may  show  itself; 
even  where  she  cannot  return  the  feeling  she  will 
find  some  good  use  for  it— but  very  often  she  will 
be  able  to  fully  reciprocate  and  reach  the  ideal  en- 
joyment of  love,  the  last  experience  of  which  may 
be  fully  as  beautiful  as  the  first.  Her  love-life  will 
be  free  from  mercenary  considerations  and  she  will 
retain  her  freedom  by  giving  and  receiving  love 
without  reserve  and  without  conditions. 

If  a  man  desires  her  as  his  house-keeper  and  she 
feels  inclined  for  such  work,  she  may  accept  a  favor- 
able offer  even  if  she  has  no  love  for  him.  She  may 
prefer,  however,  to  make  a  home  for  a  congenial 
man  for  a  considerably  less  remuneration,  but 
whether  with  or  without  love  there  will  always 
be  a  business  agreement.  And  if  she  should  desire 
maternity  she  will  find  that  there  are  as  many  men 
who  desire  to  be  fathers  as  there  are  women  who 
wish  to  become  mothers,  and  that  not  a  single  one 
of  the  former  will  expect  ever  to  gain  that  privilege 
without  offering  a  just  equivalent  for  that  grandest 
and  noblest  of  all  woman's  work,  child-bearing  and 
child-nursing.  It  has  often  been  said  that  the  fact 
that  the  "fruits  of  love"  (a  very  pretty  name  for 
children,  which,  alas,  but  very  few  deserve  at  pres- 
ent) are  a  burden  to  woman,  must  forever  make 
the  latter  dependent  upon  man.  Under  the  present 
general  code  of  morals  this  is  true  of  course  and 
the  "beautiful"  story  of  the  punishment  of  sinful 
Eve  still  holds  good.  But  our  free  woman  is  bold 


—  246  — 

enough  to  declare  that  even  child-bearing  is  not 
by  any  means  her  "self-evident  duty,"  nor  the  ne- 
cessary result  of  her  love,  and  thereby  reaches  the 
conclusion  that  whenever  she  does  undertake  the 
task  it  will  bring  her  genuine  joy  and  satisfaction 
and  general  appreciation,  and  at  the  same  time 
give  her  another  little  economic  advantage  over 
man,  for  the  simple  reason  that  it  leaves  the  pro- 
duction of  a,  highly  valued  thing,  generally  con- 
sidered a  necessity,  exclusively  at  the  option  of 
women ! 

As  a  man  would,  so  a  free  woman  would  gladly 
accept  the  help  and  assistance  of  a  friend  and  com- 
rade in  case  of  illness  or  misfortune,  but  she  will 
not  expect  to  be  "kept,"  "maintained,"  or  "sup- 
ported" by  a  man.  As  the  young  man  is  expected 
to  choose  a  vocation  for  earning  his  living,  so  the 
free  woman  will  select  that  field  of  action  for  the 
purpose  which  seems  most  suitable  to  her,  and 
whether  she  becomes  a  house-keeper  or  a  sea-cap- 
tain, a  Kindergarten-teacher  or  a  doctor  of  med- 
icine, a  book-keeper  or  a  barber,  a  musician  or  a 
painter,  there  is  not  the  slightest  danger  for  her 
true  womanliness,  because  there  is  no  reason  to 
suppress  her  sex-nature.  And  man,  perceiving  that 
none  of  these  vocations  deprives  her  of  any  of  her 
value  as  a  woman,  but  that  on  the  contrary  her 
higher  intelligence,  her  more  profound  knowledge 
of  the  world,  make  her  a  more  useful  friend  and 
comrade,  a  nobler  companion  in  spiritual  pleasures 
and  sexual  enjoyments,  will  gladly  welcome  her  co- 
operation in  any  branch  of  art,  science,  or  industry. 


—  247  — 

Her  competition  may  cause  a  slight  depreciation 
m  the  valuation  of  his  services,  but  for  this  loss  he 
receives  a  more  than  sufficient  compensation,  i.  e., 
the  chance  to  enjoy  all  of  the  pleasures  of  love  with- 
out being  forced  thereby  to  "sustain"  a  woman, 
nor  even  to  support  a  child,  unless  he  should  have 
the  express  desire  and  the  perfect  ability  so  to  do. 

If  a  free  woman  happens  to  be  economically 
somewhat  "independent"  she  may  decide  to  have 
a  child  as  all  her  own  and  she  will  certainly  not  be 
respected  any  the  less  for  it  in  a  free  society,  but  it 
is  my  firm  conviction  that  these  cases  Avill  be  the 
rare  exceptions ;  even  the  wealthy  free  woman  will 
generally  prefer  to  choose  a  father  for  her  child, 
assigning  him  a  "half-interest"  in  it,  realizing  that 
there  are  many  advantages  in  fathership  besides 
the  financial  support. 

Unless  it  is  gained  through  deceit,  the  love  of  a 
free  woman  for  a  man  may  be  expected  to  last  for 
life,  as  it  need  not  be  extinguished  for  the  sake  of 
any  other  affection.  She  will  be  a  truer  Mend,  a 
more  reliable  partner  and  comrade,  because  no 
passion  will  induce  her  to  unfaithfulness. 

In  most  cases,  perhaps,  she  will  be  far  from 
economic  independence,  but  she  will  perceive  that 
her  comrade,  man,  is  no  less  dependent.  Together 
with  him  she  will  strive  to  bring  about  such  a  con- 
dition of  society  that  human  beings  will  not  be  en- 
slaved as  at  present  by  that  mad  struggle  for  the 
"medium  of  exchange."  She  will  realize,  however, 
that  even  under  existing  circumstances  she  has  the 
same  chances,  the  same  rights  and  privileges  as 


—  248  — 

man  possesses,  and  she  will  not  consider  herself  at 
a  disadvantage  because  she  is  a  woman ! 

At  this  point  I  hear  an  energetic  objection: 
"How  can  you  claim  that  women  have  the  same 
rights  as  men  have  so  long  as  they  are  not  allowed 
to  vote  nor  to  sit  on  a  jury?"  Woman's  Suffrage! 
— indeed,  I  had  almost  neglected  this  important 
subject  altogether.  As  I  should  hate  to  be  caught 
in  an  inconsistency,  I  must  somewhat  overstep  the 
limits  of  this  treatise  and  declare  that  I  deny  the 
right  of  any  one  man  or  a  million  of  men  to  make 
compulsory  laws  for  me;  that  therefore  it  is  but 
consistent  if  I  deny  that  right  to  women  also.  I 
will  not  argue  this  question  at  present,  but  will 
simply  examine  woman's  suffrage  from  a  practical 
standpoint  as  it  would  be  viewed  by  any  intelligent 
free  woman  of  to-day.  Why  should  she  desire  to 
vote?  Will  she  not  perceive  at  once  that  nothing- 
could  more  seriously  endanger  that  freedom  for 
which  she  longs  than  woman's  suffrage?  Will  she 
not  see  that  in  the  upholding  of  the  old  moral 
code,  which  she  rejects,  women  are  more  tyran- 
nically disposed  than  men  ? 

We  have  reason  to  rejoice  at  the  fact  that  the 
"emancipated"  women  of  this  country  have  been 
so  successful  in  rousing  women  from  their  lethargic 
submission  and  imbuing  them  with  the  conscious- 
ness of  their  rights  as  individuals  (equal  to  those 
of  men),  because  this  is  absolutely  necessary  for 
any  true  reform  in  human  society.  Their  courage, 
energy  and  perseverance  are  worthy  of  our  pro- 
found admiration,  and  it  has  often  appeared  to  me 


—  249  — 

that  a  dozen  women  could  do  more  to  bring  about 
happier  conditions  in  human  society  than  fifty 
men — if  they  were  animated  by  the  true  spirit  of 
liberty.  But,  alas,  so  far  the  one  and  only  aspira- 
tion of  the  "emancipated"  woman  seems  to  be  to 
ir;iin  power  to  rule  and  to  govern!  she  seems  to  be 
unable  to  conceive  of  any  other  way  to  "get  even" 
with  men !  It  is  because  of  this  that  a  movement, 
which  in  itself  is  truly  progressive,  has  brought 
about  a  decided  retrogression  in  general  affairs, 
that  the  immediate  results  present  to  us  many 
dreary  and  ominous  pictures  of  unhealthy  reac- 
tion. It  is  due  to  woman's  influence  that  this  coun- 
try is  in  great  danger  of  becoming  the  least  free 
of  all  civilized  nations ;  without  her  influence  many 
of  our  laws,  which  are  inexcusable  infringements 
upon  the  inalienable  rights  of  the  individual,  such 
as  Sunday  laws,  prohibition  laws,  and  Comstock 
laws,  would  be  impossible  at  this  time.  The  "New 
Woman"  is  yet  too  thoroughly  imbued  with  the 
"spirit  of  Ca?sar"  to  be  much  if  any  help  to  true 
progress.  Being  more  consistent  and  less  cowardly 
than  man,  she  is  now  the  most  dangerous  enemy 
of  liberty.  Free  her  from  superstition  and  she  will 
be  invincible  in  the  fight  for  freedom. 

I  borrow  the  term  jugt  used  from  a  book  by  B.  O. 
Flower  entitled  "The  New  Time."  The  work  con- 
tains an  excellent  description  of  how  the  "spirit  of 
Caesar"  (ruling  through  brute  force— militarism)  is 
reigning  everywhere  in  present  society.  The  author 
desires  to  introduce  instead  the  "spirit  of  Jesus" 
and  repeatedly  and  emphatically  declares  "that 


—  250  — 

the  plan  of  action  ought  always  to  be  along  the 
line  of  persuasion."  The  method  of  Caesar  applied 
to-day  says,  "This  man  troubleth  us.  He  speaks 
against  the  established  order;  he  is  an  innovator 
and  foments  discontent.  Therefore  we  will  crucify 
him,  and  that  will  end  the  whole  matter."  In  place 
of  this  the  spirit  of  Jesus  should  reign,  which  would 
cause  "a  grand  evolutionary  movement  which  shall 
mark  man's  rise  above  the  old-time  method  of  pro- 
gress by  brute  force;  an  advance  in  which  the  dis- 
cord of  hate,  the  roar  of  cannon,  will  not  be  heard, 
but  in  their  stead  the  laughter  of  millions  of  hope- 
warmed  hearts  floating  from  homes  now  filled  with 
gloom;  an  advance  in  which  joy,  the  luminous 
child  of  love,  shall  lead  our  people  into  the  new 
time,  while  amazed  history,  gazing  long  before  she 
writes,  at  last  shall  pen  the  story  of  the  first  civil- 
ization of  earth  great  and  wise  enough  to  be  just !" 
A  noble  sentiment  and  a  noble  aim !  every  true 
lover  of  liberty  would  joyfully  accept  both.  And 
how  does  the  author  expect  to  reach  this  goal? 
By  uniting  with  the  Methodists,  the  Presbyterians, 
the  Baptists  et  al.,  and  especially  with  their  minis- 
ters !  Don't  laugh,  please !  Is  Mr.  B.  0.  Flower,  the 
editor  of  the  "Arena"  such  an  ignoramus  that  he 
does  not  know  that  this. spirit  of  Jesus,  as  he  de- 
fines it,  is  nowhere  to  be  found  less  than  in  the 
Christian  church  itself?  Does  he  not  know  that 
these  Methodists,  Presbyterians,  Baptists,  and 
their  ministers  are  constantly  clamoring  for  all 
kinds  of  prohibitory  laws?  and  does  he  not  know 
that  legal  law,  if  it  means  anything,  means  the  rule 


—  251  — 

and  government  of  "brute  force,*'  that  there  is 
positively  no  "persuasion"  about  it  except  in  say- 
ing, "Thou  shalt  do  so,  or  we  will  punish  or  kill 
thee?"  Or  is  he  simply  a  mean  hypocrite?  I  will  not 
venture  to  decide  this  question,  but  I  am  convinced 
that  the  book  will  inspire  many  readers  with  glow- 
ing enthusiasm  for  the  cause  who  the  next  moment 
will  use  their  energy  to  have  another  law  enacted 
which  will  force  men  to  live  "according  to  Jesus!" 

AVhen  I  see  a  number  of  sweet -faced,  innocent- 
looking  women  and  girls  of  the  Y.  P.  S.  C.  E.,  or 
the  Epworth  League,  working  so  energetically  for 
Sunday-laws.  Prohibition-laws,  and  the  like,  their 
eyes  shining  with  love  for  humankind,  their  cheeks 
glowing  with  enthusiasm  for  the  cause  of  "better- 
ing men  and  women,''  I  always  feel  inclined  to  say. 
"Forgive  them. for  they  know  not  what  they  do!", 
but  I  think  it  is  about  time  to  overcome  this  weak- 
ness and  to  denounce  the  tyrant,  Avherever  I  find 
him.  Let  us  henceforth  not  be  soothed  by  their 
claims  of  "good  intentions."  The  most  cruel  tyr- 
ants, the  worst  Caesars,  have  made  the  same  claim; 
their  atrocious  deeds  were  always  meant  "for  the 
good  of  the  people." 

Some  time  ago  the  "Arena"  contained  a  num- 
ber of  articles  on  the  "Age  of  Consent  Laws, "in 
which  several  "reverend  reformers''  and  a  few 
pseudo-radical  women  wrote  strongly  in  favor  of 
raising  the  age  of  consent  to  18  or  20  years.  What 
does  such  a  law  mean?  A  man  falls  in  love  Avith  a 
young  woman  who  happens  to  be  but  17  years  old 
and  receiving1  her  consent  they  enjoy  the  pleasures 


—  252  — 

of  sexual  love  with  each  other  without  desiring  to» 
enslave  themselves  by  a  legal  certificate  of  mutual 
ownership.  The  before-mentioned  worthy  ladies 
and  gentlemen,  together  with  a  number  of  others, 
have  decreed  to  call  this  rape!  They  send  out  their 
hirelings  to  catch  the  man  and  imprison  him  for 
from  five  to  twenty  years  at  hard  labor.  And  if  the 
man  tries  to  defend  himself  against  this  outrage- 
ous assault  and  finds  a  number  of  friends  to  assist 
him  in  this,  then  these  noble  people  will  call  it  "re- 
volution" and  will  send  out  their  militia  or  their 
"regular"  hired  murderers  to  shoot  down  the 
"mob"  or  to  catch  them  alive  so  that  the  sheriff 
can  have  the  pleasure  of  "'hanging  them  by  the 
neck  until  they  are  dead,"  where  the  moralists  can 
all  have  a  good  look  at  the  imposing  spectacle  in 
perfect,  safety ! 

I  wonder  whether  Mr.  Flower  would  call  this 
the  "spirit  of  Jesus"  or  the  "spirit  of  Caesar?''  His 
esteemed  co-workers  would  of  course  call  it  the 
"spirit  of  Jesus,"  seeing  that  the  law  has  such  a 
good,  moral  intention,  namely,  the  protection  of 
poor  weak  woman ! 

I  hope  and  trust  that  the  free  woman  will  be 
proud  enough  to  feel  that  any  law  made  for  the 
special  purpose  of  "protecting  women"  is  an  insult 
of  womankind.  I  hope  that  she  will  be  glad  that 
women  have  not  been  sullied  yet  by  the  degrading 
and  depraving  practices  of  politics,  that  she  can 
say  to  men:  We  women  have  had  nothing  to  do  with 
the  making  of  your  laws,  hence  there  is  not  even  a 
shadow  of  a  reason  why  we  should  respect  them.. 


—  253  — 

"We  will  not  be  ruled  or  governed  by  you,  nor  do  we 
<?are  to  rule  or  govern  you  or  any  of  our  own  sex. 
And  if  her  sister  tells  her  that  woman's  suffrage 
would  result  in  excellent  laws  for  the  special  pro- 
tection of  women,  I  hope  she  will  answer  as  I  would 
like  to  have  every  laborer  ot  this  country  reply  to 
the  glib  promises  of  the  politician .  Take  away  the 
unjust  special  privileges  bestowed  on  others,  give 
me  a  free  and  full  opportunity  to  utilize  my  ener- 
gies, and  I  will  need  neither  your  regular  nor  your 
special  laws  to  protect  me. 

I  do  not  wish  to  imbue  any  one  with  the  "spirit 
of  Jesus" — there  is  too  much  slavish  submissiveness 
flavored  with  arrogant  vanity  in  it  to  suit  me;  it 
makes  love  a  duty  and  preaches  such  an  unnatural 
"virtue"  as  altruism,  which  is  extremely  liable  to 
cause  hypocrisy  —  nevertheless  I  can  respect  Jesus 
mid.  any  one  of  his  honest  and  true  followers.  I  will 
gladty  listen  to  their  efforts  at  persuasion  if  they 
are  fair  enough  to  give  me  an  equal  chance  to  per 
suade  them,  but  I  hope  that  every  free  man  and 
woman  will  join  with  me  in  the  fight  against  those 
tyrants,  be  they  sweet-faced  women  or  fierce-eyed 
men,  who  wish  to  "persuade"  us  by  their  own  or 
by  hired  brute  force. 

And  in  conclusion  I  will  say  that  the  worst  foes 
of  human  happiness  are  those  hypocrites  who  try 
to  hide  the  spirit  of  Ca3sar  behind  the  mask  of  Jesus. 


XXV. 
The  Social  Question. 


'"PHE  social  question  pertains  to  all  the  rules  and! 
agencies  which  govern  or  are  proposed  to 
govern  relations  of  man  to  man,  the  intercourse 
of  human  beings.  It  is  therefore  frequently  divided 
into  a  number  of  different  branches  according  to 
the  diverse  spheres  to  which  it  may  refer  (the  sex- 
ual, the  social,  or  the  commercial  intercourse).  In 
this  chapter  I  intend  to  treat  on  that  most  intricate 
and  most  essential  branch  of  the  all-important 
subject,  which  is  generally  termed  the  economic 
question,  pertaining  to  the  ownership  of  the  nat- 
ural resources  and  the  artificial  means  for  the  pro- 
duction of  material  goods  and  the  manner  of  divid- 
ing the  latter  amongst  the  members  of  the  human 
family.  I  do  not  pretend  to  give  you  a  solution  of 
this  question,  but  will  simply  try  to  investigate  its 
relation  to  the  sexual  question  (including  the  Love, 
Marriage,  and  Woman's  Question),  of  which  I  do 
claim  that  I  have  offered  a  solution,  which  from 
the  present  viewpoint  of  human  society,  may  be 
considered  fairly  perfect.  I  intend  to  establish  these 
propositions:  1.  That  sexual  freedom  as  herein 


—  255  — 

proposed  will  render  a  powerful  assistance  in  the 
solution  of  the  economic  question  and  of  the  social 
question  in  general;  2.  That  the  agitation  of  and 
propaganda  for  sexual  freedom  should  predom- 
inate in  our  exertions  for  improving  human  society, 
that  sexual  freedom  must  be  the  first  step  taken  in 
order  to  reach  a  satisfactory  solution  of  the  econ- 
omic question — in  spite  of  the  fact  that  the  latter 
may  be  justly  called  the  most  important  problem. 
The  first  point  to  be  considered  is  this:  How 
much  value  does  the  preventive  check  possess  for 
the  poorer  classes  irrespective  of  sexual  freedom. 
The  enthusiastic  followers  of  so-called  Xeo-Malthus- 
ianism  (the  theory  of  Malthus  applied  by  means  of 
the  preventive  check)  seem  to  claim  that  it  would 
bring  a  perfect  solution  of  the  labor  question,  and 
they  argue  something  like  this :  Every  person  who 
studies  this  question  will  find  that  there  are  a  num- 
ber of  industries  which  for  a  long,  long  time,  yes,  for 
many  centuries,  have  constantly  paid  the  lowest 
wages  in  spite  of  the  fact  that  the  work  performed 
belongs  to  the  hardest,  the  most  disagreeable,  and 
the  most  necessary  of  all  industrial  labor.  Why 
are  so  many  human  beings  again  and  again  so 
foolish  as  to  devote  themselves  to  this  work  in- 
stead of  choosing  more  agreeable  and  better  pay- 
ing vocations?  For  the  simple  reason  that  the 
crowding  into  these  vocations  is  not  by  any  means 
voluntary,  that  in  generation  after  generation 
many  thousands  are  born  for  and  into  them.  By 
this  we  should  not  understand  that  there  is  any 
particular  legal  or  moral  compulsion  connected 


—  256  — 

with  the  accident  of  birth.  The  compulsion  is  of  a 
far  stricter  and  severer  kind,  i.  e.,  the  nutrition -and 
education  which  these  people  receive  qualify  them 
for  only  one  particular  profession  or  a  certain  class 
of  work.  The  same  principle  holds  good  for  all 
classes  of  human  beings.  The  wealthier  the  parents, 
the  higher  their  intelligence,  the  greater  is  the 
list  of  professions  from  which  their  children  may 
choose;  the  poorer  the  parents,  the  lower  their 
standard  of  intelligence,  the  less  chance  of  selection 
there  will  be  for  their  progeny,  so  that  many  are 
confined  within  very  narrow  limits,  and  for  many 
others  there  is  hardly  any  choice  left.  Under  or- 
dinary circumstances  these  two  latter  classes,  the 
poor  and  the  poorest,  increase  even  more  rapidly 
than  those  who  are  better  situated,  hence  the  for- 
mer, all  going  in  the  same  direction,  must  crowd 
each  other  more  and  more,  while  the  better  situated 
have  a  broad  field  in  which  to  scatter.  This  is  one 
of  the  reasons  why,  under  existing  circumstances^ 
poverty  must  necessarily  increase  very  rapidly,  why 
the  difference  between  the  wealthy  and  the  poor 
must  grow  wider  year  by  year.  This  would  have 
become  yet  far  more  apparent  in  the  history  of 
civilized  nations  if  a  great  revolution  had  not 
caused  a  general  "mixing  up"  every  little  while, 
and  if  it  had  not  been  for  some  "preventive  checks" 
— crime,  disease,  and  starvation — in  the  poor  and 
poorest  classes,  which  constantly  decreased  to  some 
extent  the  number  of  competitors. 

Suppose  now  that  we  should  make  the  pro- 
creation of  children  a  perfectly  voluntary  act— then 


the  principle  of  the  ever-equalizing  effect  of  supply 
and  demand  would  hold  good  and  would  free  us 
from  these  horrible  '"preventives."  The  poor  lab- 
orer, who  hardly  earns  enough  to  sustain  himself, 
\\ould  take  due  care  not  to  procreate  any  children 
whom  he  would  have  to  support,  and  educate  into 
his  profession.  He  would  not  bring  forth  any  com- 
petitors, influx  from  outside  there  Avould  be  little 
or  none,  the  natural  checks,  old  age  and  death, 
would  constantly  thin  the  ranks,  so  that  soon  the 
demand  would  be  greater  than  the  supply  and  the 
wages  would  have  to  be  raised.  Another  point 
worthy  of  consideration  is  found  in  the  fact  that 
large  families  make  moving1  far  more  difficult  and 
hence  are  another  great  impediment  to  the  equal- 
izing principle. 

I  consider  these  arguments  irrefutable,  if  they 
are  offered  to  substantiate  no  other  claim  than 
that  the  preventive  check  would  be  a  great  help  to 
the  laboring  classes.  With  such  a  claim  I  offer 
them  as  one  of  the  proofs  to  support  my  ar,e  jrtion 
No.  1. 

I  will  now  state  my  reasons  why  I  am  not  a 
Malthusian,  or,  in  other  words,  wrhy  I  consider  it 
absurd  to  propose  limitation  of  offspring  as  a  solu- 
tion of  the  labor  question. 

The  foregoing  argumentation  is  perfectly  log- 
ical and  indisputable,  and  the  conclusions  drawn 
from  it  in  regard  to  the  equalizing  effect  of  "supply 
and  demand"  would  also  be  correct  if  the  evident 
presumption,  ''free  competition,"  were  not  a  fatal 
delusion.  Every  logical  thinker  will  promptly  ad- 


—  258  - 

mit  that  free  competition  is  absolutely  necessary 
to  bring  about  a  satisfactory  effect  through  equal- 
ization by  supply  and  demand,  and  a  serious  study 
'of  sociology  •will  show  that  there  is  no  such  thing 
as  free  competition  in  any  "civilized"  nation  of  the 
world,  and  never  will  be  so  long  as  the  blind  super- 
stition  of  the  masses  gives  to  the  few  a  great  num- 
ber of  extraordinary  privileges  and  advantages 

If  this  should  not  be  sufficient  to  convince  tne 
Malthusians,  I  would  remind  them  of  the  fact  that 
even  the  most  sanguine  of  their  number  will  have 
to  admit  that  theirs  is  an  extremely  slow  process. 
Unfortunately,  our  economic  affairs  have  already 
reached  such  a  critical  condition  that  we  will  hardly 
be  patient  enough  to  be  satisfied  with  an  "equal- 
izing medium"  which  requires  at  least  half  a  century 
to  show  any  remarkable  beneficient  results.  I  think 
we  will  have  to  take  a  somewhat  stronger  medicine. 

So  much  for  the  preventive  check  in  itself.  I  will 
now  try  to  show  the  influence  of  sexual  freedom 
upon  social  conditions  in  general,  and  will  begin 
with  the  most  unfortunate  class : 

In  the  so-called  "slum-districts"  of  every  large 
city  you  can  find  a  number  of  human  beings  who 
are  very  prolific  and  of  whose  progeny  we  must  say 
that  their  unfortunate  heredity,  training,  and  edu- 
cation makes  them  unfit  even  for  the  lowest  of  the 
"honest  vocations,"  so  that  we  cannot  reasonably 
expect  them  to  become  anything  but  embittered 
enemies  of  human  society.  We  hear  a  great  deal  of 
the  noble  work  of  charity  performed  by  courageous 
men  and  women  who  enter  these  districts  to  relieve 


—  259  — 

the  suffering  oi  their  fellow-beings.  The  majority 
of  these  philanthropists  simply  ignore  this  "sub- 
merged tenth"  as  ''undeserving''  and  the  others 
keep  them  from  starving  just  long  enough  to  in- 
crease. Suppose  now  that  free  men  and  women 
should  undertake  the  work  of  charity  in  these  dis- 
tricts. They  would  give  to  every  woman  there  the 
information  and  the  means  necessary  to  enjoy  sex- 
ual intercourse  without  incurring  maternal  duties. 
They  would  not  care  to  discriminate  between  the 
"deserving"  and  the  ''undeserving."  nor  between 
the  "moral"  and  the  "immoral."  It  would  be  a 
truly  charitable  act  and  would  at  the  same  time 
help  a  great  deal  in  bringing  about  better  social 
conditions. 

But  the  impatient  reformer  simply  declares  this 
to  be  but  a  miserable  palliative,  and  says  that  we 
must  change  the  entire  system  so  that  there  will 
be  no  more  "slum-districts."  I  heartily  agree  with 
him,  but  I  hope  that  he  will  not  claim  that  the  in- 
crease of  this  most  unfortunate  class  is  conducive 
to  that  end,  but  will  see  that  its  decrease  must  be 
of  great  assistance  in  the  work  of  social  regener- 
ation . 

Whatever  his  theory  of  reform  may  be,  he  Avill 
tell  us  that  we  must  look  to  that  great  body,  the 
laboring  class,  the  wage-earners,  to  put  it  into  ex- 
ecution. Therefore,  I  will  now  try  to  show  how  sex- 
ual freedom  will  assist  this  class  in  their  evolution- 
ary or  revolutionary  work.  Suppose  that  a  large 
body  of  laborers  in  one  of  our  great  industrial  cen- 
ters resolves  to  take  some  definite  action  against 


—  260  — 

the  unjust  and  cruel  conditions  under  which  they 
suffer.  What  are  the  main  requisites  to  secure  them 
success?  Buoyancy  of  spirit,  courage  and  persever- 
ance, a  joyful  willingness  to  bring  some  sacrifice  to 
the  noble  cause,  confidence  in  their  comrades,  in- 
timate co-operation,  solidarity !  I  claim  that  sex- 
ual freedom  will  give  them  all  of  this,  and  that  an 
absurd  love-ideal,  a  false  morality,  and  sexual 
slavery,  make  this  utterly  impossible  to-day.  I 
have  repeatedly  called  the  attention  of  the  reader 
to  the  fact  that  our  horrible  sexual  conditions  are 
seriously  endangering  the  noblest  qualities  in  man, 
and  that  nothing  is  more  liable  to  inspire  a  man 
with  stanch  courage,  the  power  of  resistance,  and 
with  that  buoyancy  of  spirit  which  makes  him  long- 
to  do  grand  and  noble  deeds  than  a  healthy  and 
happy  sex-life.  What  have  the  laborers  to  boast  of 
in  this  respect  ?  I  am  well  aware  that  healthy  phys- 
ical exercise  kept  a  great  man v  of  them  in  the  da  vs 

t  . 

of  childhood  and  early  youth  from  the  morbid 
phantasies  and  malpractices  which  cause  so  much 
prematurity  and  weakness  in  the  ''lowest"  as  well 
as  the  "most  refined''  classes ;  I  am  well  aware  that 
the  so-called  laboring  class  can  show  up  compar- 
atively more  sexually  healthy  young  men  than  any 
other  class — but  what  does  this  mean?  It  means 
that  when  the  young  fellow,  the  sturdy  workman 
of  twenty  or  twenty-one,  has  finished  his  daily  task, 
he  wrants  a  woman  and  he  will  have  a  woman. 
•Where  does  hefindher?  He  may  go  to  the  prostitute 
and  lose  his  hard-earned  in oney  and  his  self-respect ; 
he  may  "seduce"  an  unfortunate  female  comrade 


—  261  — 

(who  has  also  retained  her  sexual  health  and  hence 
feels  the  same  strong,  natural  impulse)  and  be 
forced  to  lying'  and  desertion,  or  he  may  be  too 
noble  a  fellow  for  either  course  of  action  and  so, 
loving  a  s\veet  young  girl  (who  generally  happens 
to  be  as  poor  as  he  is),  he  makes  up  his  mind  to  be 
true  to  his  darling.  In  this  latter  case  you  will 
have  a  chance  to  observe  the  ennobling  influence 
of  love — but,  alas!  it  will  not  last  long.  If  the 
lovers  have  been  "sinning."  then  a  prompt  mar- 
riage will  soon  be  necessary  to  "save  the  honor  of 
the  woman/'  and  if  they  are  strictly  ''virtuous," 
then  they  cannot  stand  a  long  engagement  (which 
seems  so  easy  in  the  "respectable  middle  class"); 
they  are  too  healthy  for  that.  They  are  in  a  hurry 
to  be  united  and  so  soon  as  they  have  scraped  to- 
gether a  few  dollars  the  marriage  takes  place.  And 
what  then?  They  sleep  together!  and  they  now  get 
such  a  thorough  satisfaction  of  their  desires  that 
that  alone  would  be  sufficient  to  take  all  of  the 
high-spirited  buoyancy  out  of  them  if  there  were 
not  plenty  of  other  reasons.  Before  he  got  married 
the  young  man  had  lived  quite  comfortably  on  his 
11.00,  $1.50,  or  f2.00  a  day  and  he  always  had  a 
little  saved  up  for  an  eventual  "lay-off."  Of  course 
he  had  to  give  his  beloved  as  good  a  home  as  he 
possibly  could  and  to  do  this  had  to  borrow  a  little 
money  from  his  friends,  and  now  he  is  always  in  a 
pinch.  His  wife  is  always  worrying  and  trying  to 
.save  up  a  little  money  for  the  baby  which  is  soon  to 
come,  and  the  prospect  which  she  sees  before  her 
is  pregnancy — baby — nursing,  pregnancy — baby — 


—  262  — 

nursing  in  endless  succession,  and  work,  work  every 
day  from  morning  until  night.  And  with  all  this  is 
the  constant  fear  that  her  husband  may  "lose  his 
job"  (which  is  so  extremely  liable  to  happen  to  the 
best  and  most  able  wage-earners  at  present).  The 
two  are  yet  true  loving  comrades,  but  for  some 
reason  or  another  their  chats  with  each  other  are 
not  so  jolly  as  they  used  to  be  and  always  turn  to 
sad  and  gloomy  subjects.  In  short,  the  poesy  of  life 
is  gone  and  the  dreary,  endless  prose  has  begun. 
And  if  the  man  hears  of  the  new  ideas,  the  prac- 
ticalization  of  which  promise  better  conditions,  if 
the  consciousness  of  great  injustice  has  stirred 
within  him  the  necessary  enthusiasm  for  courage- 
ous resistance  and  , energetic  action  in  harmony 
with  his  fellow-laborers — then  one  look  at  his  suffer- 
ing wife,  a,t  his  helpless  babes,  will  often  suffice  to 
make  him  bow  humbly  and  submissively  as  before 
to  the  dictates  of  his  "master."  Do  you  doubt  this? 
Then  let  me  tell  you  that  the  owners  of  large  manu- 
facturing establishments  knew  it  long  ago;  they 
are  well  aware  of  the  fact  that  the  institution  of 
marriage  has  a  great  financial  value  for  them. 

I  ask  you  again  :  Where  will  you  get  the  men 
to  fight  courageously  and  energetically  for  a  cause 
while  such  conditions  exist? 

But  this  is  not  all.  What  about  the  friendship, 
the  comradeship-feeling  among  the  laborers?  Does 
not  jealousy  and  the  strife  for  the  possession  of  a 
woman  again  and  again  cause  animosity  and  bit- 
ter hatred  among  them  ?  and — what  is  far  more  im- 
portant yet — does  not  the  fact  that  they  divide 


—  263  — 

-themselves  into  small  circles  (families)  for  their  ex- 
clusive love,  with  hardly  any  connecting;  links  be- 
tween them  except,  perhaps,  practical  business- 
co-operation,  and  the  further  fact  that  a  foolish 
love-ideal  necessitates  the  placing  of  high  and  wide 
barriers  between  these  many  little  circles,  make  an 
intimate  co-operation,  a  real  solidarity,  absolutely 
impossible? 

And  another  point :  What  about  the  influence 
of  women  in  the  struggle  for  freedom  and  better 
conditions?  The  prostitute  has  only  an  ironical 
smile  for  your  hopes  and  aspirations;  for  the 
••sweetheart''  there  is  but  one  end  to  work  for, 
union  with  her  lover,  the  saving-  of  the  necessary 
money  for  a  home  and  family:  the  wife  thinks  only 
of  her  hungry  children  and  the  babe  in  her  womb, 
and  the  others  are  not  near  enough  to  you  to  have 
any  particular  influence  whatever. 

Again  I  ask  you,  men:  How  can  you  expect 
ever  to  be  successful  in  your  work  of  reform  while 
the  influence  of  women  (which  must  forever  have  a 
mighty  effect  upon  you), instead  of  being  strength- 
ening, is  decidedly  weakening? 

Let  us  now  suppose  that  a  number  of  male  and 
female  laborers  in  a  large  manufacturing  place  are 
free  men  and  women.  Undeniably,  they  would  have 
one  great  advantage — whether  they  are  fairly  well 
situated  or  deplorably  poor,  they  can  always  enjoy 
love,  the  genuine  thing  to  the  full  extent.  After 
their  day's  labor  is  ended  the  men  will  have  a 
•chance  for  an  intimate,  free,  and  unrestrained  so- 
cial intercourse  with  sympathetic,  respectable,  and 


—  264  — 

self-respecting  women ;.  in  large  groups,  boys  and 
girls,  men  and  women,  young  and  old,  they  will 
go  out  together  to  have  a  "jolly  good  time,"  or 
they  will  call  upon  each  other  for  friendly  private 
chats  in  their  snug  little  "boudoirs,"  and  every- 
where they  will  be  filled  with  the  glad  conviction 
that  there  is  at  least  one  beautiful  thing  in  this 
world,  which  is  a  constant  source  of  joys  and  pleas- 
ures, of  which  all  the  tyrants  in  the  world  cannot 
deprive  them,  which  need  not  involve  an  economic 
question — which,  in  fact,  need  not  cost  a  cent !  And 
if  the  hale  and  hearty  young  laborer  is  craving 
for  sexual  pleasures  he  will  find  that  the  dear 
girls  across  the  street  have  exactly  the  same  desire, 
and  that  there  is  not  a  single  reason  to  be  found 
wh\r either  of  them  should  suffer  sexual  hunger.  All 
that  is  necessary  for  him  to  do  is  to  constantly 
show  himself  such  an  excellent  fellow  that  he  will 
have  a  good  chance  of  often  being  "first  choice.''  If 
he  is  not  satisfied  with  his  boarding  place  and  one 
of  his  best  friends  feels  rather  lonely  in  her  fifth 
story  room  in  the  rickety  tenement-building  where 
she  is  surrounded  by  uncongenial  neighbors,  the 
two  may  resolve  to  rent  a  suit  of  rooms  instead  of 
the  two  separated  ones  and  establish  a  little  joint 
home  and  household.  The  woman,  instead  of  get- 
ting meals  for  one  as  heretofore,  now  prepares  them 
for  two  and  instead  of  keeping  one  room  tidy  now 
attends  to  three  or  four.  For  this  extra  work  the 
man  will  gladly  pay  the  amount  of  his  former 
board-money  and  considerably  more  even  when  he 
can  afford  it.  This  means  for  the  woman  an  in- 


—  265  — 

creased  income  or  a  shorter  day's  work  at  her  for- 
mer occupation.  There  is  no  reason  though  why 
the  two  should  make  this  a  long-time  contract  or 
agreement.  If  at  any  time  they  find  that  it  does 
not  pay  or  that  the  benefits  gained  are  not  worth 
the  extra  cost,  the}"  can  easily  settle  up  and  dis- 
solve the  partnership.  Remember  that  this  living- 
together  has  not  the  meaning  which  it  has  to-day. 
The  fact  that  the  partnership  exists,  does  not  of 
itself  show  that  they  love  each  other,  and  the  fact 
that  it  is  dissolved  by  no  means  indicates  that  love 
has  ceased.  After  their  little  household  is  given  up 
they  may  be  as  jolly  good  friends  as  ever,  who  are 
not  at  all  sorry  that  they  have  tried  the  interest- 
ing experiment.  If,  however,  the  experiment  has 
proved  a  success,  if  the  near  neighborhood  has 
strengthened  their  friendship  and  if  this  associa- 
tion of  interests,  this  first  little  business  partner- 
ship, has  increased  their  trust  and  confidence  in 
each  other,  then  a  firm  and  solid  comradeship-con- 
tract for  life  may  be  the  result.  Their  New  Love- 
Ideal  will  safely  guard  them  however  against  mak- 
ing any  sexual-  or  love-contract  or  of  ever  excluding 
themselves  from  any  love  or  sympathy  which  any 
outsider  may  have  to  offer  them.  Wherever  you 
meet  them,  be  it  in  their  cozy  home,  at  a  public 
meeting,  or  at  a  pic-nic  or  dance,  you  will  never 
notice  any  label  upon  them. 

"And  will  they  have  no  babies?"  I  will  promptly 
give  the  answer  which  I  know  my  opponent  expects 
from  me:  Xo !  they  will  enjoy  all  kinds  of  love  to 
the  full  extent  of  their  capacity,  but  when  it  comes 


—  266  — 

to  the  sexual  embrace  the}'  will  use  the  preventive 
cheek. 

And  it  seems  to  me  that  I  heard  a  voice  saying, 
"Anything  more,  my  Lord?" 

I  suppose  that  Mrs.  Waisbroker  and  many  of 
her  readers  think  that  the  little  pamphlet,  which 
bears  the  above  interrogation  as  its  title,  gives  us 
irrefutable  arguments  against  the  use  of  preventive 
checks.  Remember,  however,  that  all  the  arguments 
made  therein  refer  only  to  the  enslaved,  supersti- 
tious woman  and  hence  do  not  apply  to  our  case. 
Mrs.  Waisbroker  asks:  "Has  not  the  miner's  wife 
as  good  a  right  to  be  a  mother  as  the  wife  of  the 
millionaire?"  Certainly  she  has,  but  this  is  not  at 
all  the  question  which  we  have  to  answer.  It  was 
answered  long  ago  by  the  unanimous  vote  of  all 
kinds  and  all  classes  of  honest  reformers.  The  prob- 
lem which  confronts  us  to-day  and  which  we  must 
solve  now  is  this :  Shall  the  toiling  woman  demand 
a  safe  guarantee  for  a  decent  support  for  herself 
and  child  before  she  has  the  baby,  or  shall  she  have 
the  baby  first  and  then  go  down  upon  her  knees 
and  humbly  beg  for  a  piece  of  bread  to  keep  it  from 
starving?  I  advise  that  she  secure  the  guarantee 
first;  I  recommend  the  preventive  check  because 
without  it  the  advice  would  be  silly  and  useless, 
and  I  will  add  that  I  would  rather  see  the  woman 
a  "striker"  in  this  respect  for  her  entire  life  than  to 
have  her  subjected  to  the  unjust  and  cruel  humilia- 
tion under  which  she  suffers  to-day ! 

But  our  free  women  will  have  an  excellent 
chance  for  prompt  success  in  a  strike  of  this  kind. 


—  267  — 

In  the  "free  society"  of  laborers  the  "new  ideas" 
will  spread  like  wild-fire,  and  they  will  there  find 
conditions  which  will  enable  the  people  to  act  upon 
them.  As  explained  in  the  foregoing,  a  single  man 
and  a  single  woman  may  find  it  to  their  mutual 
advantage  to  join  forces  in  many  respects.  This 
will  mean  no  more  than  a  business  partnership  or 
the  association  of  interests  of  friendship.  Even  the 
"conservative"'  knows  that  neither  of  these  need 
be  exclusive.  Perceiving  the  advantages  of  the  as- 
sociation and  co-operation  of  two  human  Jbeirigs, 
even  the  dullest  of  our  free  men  and  women  will  be- 
gin to  think  that  the  ad  vantage  for  each  individual 
might  be  increased  by  taking  in  a  few  more.  Why 
not  establish  a  joint  home  and  household  of  a, 
dozen  men  and  a  dozen  women?  Under  the  old  sys- 
tem of  marriage  and  sexual  possession,  under  the 
reign  of  the  old  love-ideal,  "co-operative  homes" 
can  never  be  a  success,  but  I  defy  you  to  show  me 
a  single  reason  why  they  would  not  work  well  with 
free  men  and  women,  if  you  give  them  the  one  thing 
which  they  must  and  will  have — one  room  for  each 
individual  in  which  he  or  she  is  the  exclusive  mas- 
ter. But  there  are  a  thousand  other  aims  and 
aspirations  in  which  association  and  co-operation 
would  bring  great  advantage  to  each  and  every 
individual.  Ninety-nine  out  of  a  hundred  of  all  the 
laborers  of  to-day  who  have  taken  up  any  of  the 
"new  ideas,"  are  well  aware  of  this,  but,  as  I  have 
already  explained,  they  cannot  act  upon  their  con- 
victions, because  they  are  afraid  of  each  other! 
Where  free  men  and  women  see  anv  advantage  in 


—  268  — 

•co-operating,  they  will  promptly  do  so.  They  will 
not  calculate  upon  any  "altruism"  in  their  com- 
rades, but  they  will  have  perfect  faith  and  con- 
fidence in  them,  because  they  feel  that  each  one  of 
them  cannot  work  in  any  better  way  for  his  own 
happiness  than  by  helping  the  general  cause ;  they 
will  feel  safe  and  secure  because  of  that  general 
sense  of  "solidarity,"  which  is  an  impossibility 
wherever  they  divide  up  into  a  number  of  small 
exclusive  love-circles,  (marriages,  "love-relations." 
"free  unions,"  etc.)  of  which  each  has  its  distinctly 
separated  aims  and  aspirations.  And  how  about 
that  comradeship-contract?  Will  they  not  perceive 
very  soon  that  the  more  it  is  extended,  the  more 
persons  it  includes,  the  less  it  will  enslave  and  the 
more  surely  it  will  guarantee  their  comfort,  and 
safety?  And  will  they  not  finally  reach  the  convic- 
tion that  after  it  includes  an  entire  nation  or,  bet- 
ter yet,  the  entire  world,  it  will  bring  an  absolute 
economic  independence  to  each  and  every  human 
being  without  any  noticeable  sacrifice  of  personal 
liberty  ? 

In  regard  to  the  children-question,  I  Mill  say 
that  we  may  expect  that  at  the  time  of  the  estab- 
lishment of  the  "free  society  of  laborers"  there  will 
be  a  good  many  children  amongst  them.  The  first 
care  of  the  society  will  be  to  see  to  it  that  not  a 
single  one  of  these  shall  suffer  want  and  so  long  as 
this  is  not  an  easy  matter  they  will  not  think  of 
increasing  the  number.  But  they  will  gradually  be- 
come conscious  of  the  great  power  which  unity 
gives  them  and  they  will  be  asking  for  a  great 


—  269  — 

many  things,  and  also  for  more  babies — that  is, 
not  merely  babies,  but  for  babies  with  pretty 
clothes,  good  food,  and  first  class  surroundings, 
and  they  will  soon  have  all  these  things  too. 

And  how  about  the  influence  of  the  women? 
Does  it  require  any  further  argument  to  convince 
you  that  it  could  never  be  weakening,  that  it  would 
always  be  decidedly  strengthening?  Under  the  pres- 
ent circumstances  the  man,  who  is  filled  with  noth- 
ing but  a  selfish  greed  for  money,  who  bows  sub- 
missively to  every  dictate  of  his  master  in  order  to 
retain  his  position  and  obtain  a  little  extra  reward 
here  and  there,  has  by  far  the  best  chance  to  gain, 
if  not  the  love,  then  at  least  the  possession  of  a 
good  and  respectable  woman.  That  would  not  be 
the  way  to  secure  the  love  of  a  free  woman.  You 
may  rest  assured  that  that  man  will  be  the  "pet" 
of  the  free  women  who  acts  most  nobly  and  most 
magnanimously  for  the  general  welfare,  for  the 
general  cause.  To-day  such  a  man  may  also  receive 
the  admiration,  the  praise,  yes,  even  the  secret  love 
of  the  fair  sex,  but  when  he  desires  to  find  enjoy- 
ment, rest,  and  new  inspiration  at  the  bosom  of  a 
beloved  woman,  the  "practical"  fellow  has  carried 
off  the  bride,  because  he  is  better  equipped  to  suj> 
port  a  family.  And  if  he  has  a  family  of  his  own 
already,  who  can  blame  the  wife,  if  she  has  nothing 
but  laments  and  reproaches  for  his  actions,  if  she 
chides  and  derides  him  for  neglecting  his  own  child- 
ren for  the  benefit  of  the  children  of  humanity  in 
genera!? 

And  again  I  tell  you :  Give  up  this  foolish  hope 


—  270  — 

~that  the  world  may  be  redeemed  by  the  self-sacrifice 
and  self-abnegation  of  fanatic  cranks.  Free  your- 
selves from  superstition  and  you  will  soon  find 
that  each  one  of  you  is  fully  qualified  for  noble 
actions  and  that  the  noblest  deeds  bring1  the  great- 
est happiness.  * 

*         * 

In  the  discussions  on  this  subject  I  have  heard 
some  ve?-y  queer  objections.  Several  men  have 
made  the  assertion  in  good  earnest,  that  if  we 
would  give  the  laborer  a  happy  love-life  he  would 
be  so  contented  in  his  humble  position  that  he 
would  not  care  to  strive  for  any  more,  and,  fur- 
thermore, that  our  only  hope  consists  in  the  con- 
dition of  the  laboring  classes  being  made  so 'miser- 
able that  despair  will  finally  fire  them  with  the 
courage  for  violent  action  ! 

In  regard  to  the  latter  assertion,  I  will  say 
that  this  world  will  never  be  bettered  by  violent 
actions  caused  by  the  courage  of  despair.  What  we 
need  is  steadfast,  persistent  action  and  the  cour- 
age of  buoyant  and  hopeful  enthusiasm.  And  to 
the  first  assertion  I  would  answer  that  in  my 
estimation  that  capitalist  came  far  nearer  to  the 
truth  who  said  :  "It  would  be  all  right,  if  I  thought 
that  they  would  be  permanently  satisfied  with  this 
increase,  but  experience  has  taught  us  that  the 
more  you  give  these  damned  fellows  the  more  they 
want.  Before  these  cursed  'reformers'  imbued  them 
with  these  horrible  new  ideas  they  were  always 
contented  and  (here  one  of  the  most  fallacious  of 
all  proverbs  comes  in  extremely  handy)  'the  great- 


—  271  — 

est  happiness  is  contentment.'"  There  is  indeed  a 
great  deal  of  truth  in  this.  So  long  as  a  man  is 
thoroughly  imbued  with  the  feeling  that  he  was 
born  a  slave  he  may  be  perfectly  contented  with 
the  crust  you  fling  to  him ;  when  he  begins  to  think 
that  he  deserves  a  little  better  treatment,  because 
he  happens  to  be  a  human  being,  he  will  want  some 
good  bread  and  some  butter  on  it,  too;  the  better 
you  treat  him  the  more  his  intellectual  capacity 
will  increase;  the  more  you  give  him,  the  more  the 
consciousness  of  the  importance  of  his  own  self  will 
increase,  and  so  it  has  finally  come  to  pass  that 
many  a  poor  devil,  who  does  not  "own"  an  inch  of 
this  earth,  who  does  not  even  own  the  suit  he  wears 
(as  he  is  still  in  debt  to  the  tailor  for  it)  and  who 
has  just  spent  his  last  nickel,  has  the  audacity  to 
declare  that  because  he  is  hard  at  work  for  ten 
hours  of  each  working-day  at  an  extremely  useful 
task  he  is  entitled,  not  only  to  a  "good  living," 
but  to  a  good  fair  average  of  all  wordly  goods. 
And  the  queerest  part  about  it  is  that  it  is  an 
extremely  difficult  task  to  find  a  single  valid  ar- 
gument in  disproof  of  such  an  "absurd  claim !" 

Do  not  be  afraid  that  our  free  men  and  women 
will  be  too  contented.  In  fact,  they  will  not  crave 
for  contentment  at  all;  they  will  wish  to  awake 
every  morning  filled  with  a  thousand  different  de- 
sires, so  that  they  will  stand  a  good  chance  of  hav- 
ing some  of  them  gratified  during  the  day  and  have 
plenty  of  them  left  for  the  work  of  the  morrow. 
They  will  kno\v  that  it  is  not  contentment  but  the 
satisfaction  of  a  desire  which  "gives  us  pleasure; 


—  272  — 

that  therefore  it  is  desire  and  not  the  absence  of 
desire  which  is  necessary  for  true  happiness.  Do  not 
talk  to  me  of  the  unhappiness  caused  by  disap- 
pointment! Only  the  fool  will  moan  and  lament 
over  "bygones"  or  crave  the  impossible,  and  where 
there  is  a  possibility  there  is  hope,  and  courageous 
and  high-spirited  free  men  and  women  are  just  the 
ones  to  make  good  use  of  their  possibilities. 

Disappointment  causes  such  intense  and  per- 
sistent misery  because  in  ninety-nine  cases  out  of 
a  hundred  the  object  sought  is  not  lost  and  forgot- 
ten, but  remains  constantly  in  view,  guarded  by 
terrible  ghosts  and  phantoms  which  frighten  you 
into  belief  in  the  impossibility  of  attainment.  If 
two  men  are  passionately  in  love  with  one  woman, 
the  disappointment  may  well  "break  the  heart"  of 
the  vanquished  suitor — not  because  of  the  disap- 
pointment in  the  desire  of  the  present,  but  because 
for  this  unhappy  superstitious  man  this  one  defeat 
means  that  he  must  forever  abstain  from  any  sim- 
ilar desires.  Suppose  the  same  case  in  a  free  society, 
and  the  disappointment  will  in  a  few  hours  refer  to 
a  perfectly  settled  bygone  matter  while  the  future 
appears,  as  ever,  full  of  hopes  and  possibilities. 
Follow  up  this  trend  of  thought  into  the  realm  of 
the  "economic,"  and  you  may  get  some  idea  of  the 
possibilities  of  the  "free  society  of  laborers." 

I  do  not  think  that  a  single  person  has  ever 
studied  the  so-called  social  question  without  being 
struck  by  the  terrible  injustice  of  our  economic  con- 
ditions, the  pernicious  influence  upon  the  general 
welfare  and  happiness,  and  the  extreme  necessity 


-  273  — 

for  a  radical  change.  Why  is  it  then,  that,  in  spite 
of  the  energetic  efforts  of  thousands  of  intelligent 
men  and  women  to  rouse  the  masses  from  their 
lethargy,  the  great  majority  are  still  indifferent 
and  conservative?  Why  is  it  that  of  all  those  per- 
sons who  would  have  the  greatest  power  of  doing- 
good  in  this  respect  (i.  e.,  the  wealthy  class)  scarcely 
one  seems  to  be  able  to  see  the  point  ?  Is  it  that 
the  standard  of  intellectual  capacity  of  all  these 
people  is  so  low  that  they  cannot  understand  the 
plain  arguments  of  common  sense?  Certainly  not. 
My  answer  is  the  same  as  the  one  given  to  the  ques- 
tion :  Why  is  religion  still  such  an  important  factor 
in  our  society,  despite  the  fact  that  true  religious- 
ness has  become  au  extremely  scarce  article?  An- 
other little  proverb  comes  in  handy  here,  "Where 
ignorance  is  bliss,  'tis  folly  to  be  wise."  I  would 
say,  however,  "Where  ignorance  is  bliss,  it  is  in 
fact  the  highest  wisdom/'  I  consider  it  far  more 
expedient  therefore  to  investigate  the  quality  of 
their  supposed  bliss  than  to  argue  the  point  of 
justice  or  truth  in  the  respective  cases.  And  in  both 
instances  the  result  for  me  must  be  either  that  they 
are  happy  and  wise,  or  that  they  are  unhappy  be- 
ca.use  they  are  fools ! 

Almost  every  one  of  the  ardent  agitators  for 
true  liberty  of  whom  I  have  ever  read  or  heard  is 
extremely  liable  to  fall  into  the  fatal  error  of  treat- 
ing the  social  question  as  if  it  were  nothing  but  an 
economic  problem.  Again  and  again  he  will  tell  us 
of  the  suffering  poor  and  the  rich  man  reveling  in 
joys  and  pleasures;  again  and  again  he  will  de- 


—  274  — 

nounce  the  latter  as  a  thief  and  a  robber  and  de- 
mand a  more  equal  distribution  of  worldly  goods 
— tor  justice's  sake ! 

And  the  rich  man  stops  up  his  ears  and  thinks, 
"Where  injustice  is  bliss,  'tis  folly  to  be  just,"  These 
"reformers"  wish  to  take  away  his  "bliss"  and  di- 
vide it  up  so  that  he  will  receive  but  a  small  share  of 
it,  His  good  friends,  "wise  and  intelligent  judges," 
tell  him  that  these  men  are  thieves  and  robbers  and 
the  latter  say  that  he  is  a  thief  and  a  robber.  Why 
should  he  seriously  stud}"  the  social  question  ? 

And  the  "bourgeois",  the  "respectable  middle- 
class,"  the  little  tradesman,  the  .shop-keeper,  who 
still  bends  over  his  account-books  long  after  his 
"laborers"  have  gone  to  rest  or  to  enjoyment? 
Where  is  his  "bliss?"  Why,  he  has  some  "property" 
and  some  "chances;"  a  few  favorable  conjunctures, 
a  few  successful  speculations,  may  bring  him  "great 
bliss"  yet,  while  the  laborer  is  "worth  nothing" 
and  has  no  chances!  Talk  to  him  of  injustice  to- 
ward the  laboring  class !  He  used  to  work  for  f  6.00 
a  month  and  save  three  of  them !  The  laborers  of 
to-day  think  too  much  of  pleasure  and  enjoyment, 
If  they  would  think  only  of  their  work  and  always 
save  as  much  as  possible  of  their  wages  they  would 
all  have  a  "chance."  And  if  you  ask  him:  "Who 
would  perform  your  hard  manual  labor,  your  dis- 
agreeable work  then?"  he  will  promptly  answer: 
"There  will  always  be  plenty  of  fools  and  spend- 
thrifts who  do  not  deserve  a  better  lot ;  they  will 
have  to  stick  to  this  work  while  wise  men  prosper." 
And  if  you  tell  of  the  good  times  to  come  when  we 


—  275  — 

will  all  ride  in  fine  carriages  and  take  it  easy,  he  is 
shrewd  enough  to  know  that  he  will  be  dead  before 
we  can  reach  that  condition. 

I  would  advise  our  noble  agitators  for  liberty 
to  pay  a  little  less  attention  to  the  question  of  jus- 
tice and  injustice  and  devote  more  time  to  the 
study  and  the  criticism  of  that  "bliss"  which  is 
retained  by  means  of  voluntary  ignorance.  It  would 
show  that  the  joys  and  the  pleasures  of  the  mil- 
lionaire are  not  as  they  appear  to  the  hungry 
tramp  at  his  gate,  that  ninety-nine  per  cent,  of  the 
happiness  of  the  rich  exists  only  in  the  imagin- 
ation of  the  poor,  that  there  is  comparatively  as 
much  genuine  joy,  as  much  true  happiness,  to  be 
found  in  the  labor-ing  class  as  in  any  other  class  of 
human  society,  that,  in  fact,  we  are  all  unhappy 
because  we  are  fools! 

Then  the  struggle  for  better  conditions  will  not 
mean  the  rich  against  the  poor  nor  capital  against 
labor,  but  it  will  consist  in  the  fight  of  libertarians 
against  tyrants,  of  wise,  enlightened  men  and 
women  against  superstitious  fools — and  we  will 
find  some  of  both  kinds  in  every  class,  from  the 
poorest  proletarians  to  the  "upper  ten." 

It  is  just  as  important  and  just  as  promising 
for  the  millionaire  and  the  "middle  class"  to  thor- 
oughly investigate  all  social  conditions  and  devote 
some  serious  study  to  the  question  "How  to  live  a 
happier  life"  as  it  is  for  the  so-called  proletarians. 
If  you  have  not  reached  the  conviction  that  a  free 
society  (for  once  I  will  use  the  term  in  the  real,  the 
broader  sense)  would  offer  fully  as  much  advant- 


—  276  — 

age  to  the  former  as  to  the  latter,  you  do  not  yet 
know  the  value  of  your  own  theory  and  hence  can- 
not expect  others  to  give  it  the  appreciation  which 
it  deserves. 

Pay  a  little  more  attention  to  the  questions  of 
love,  marriage  and  sexual  intercourse  and  it  may 
help  you  to  reach  a  more  rational  conviction.  In 
this  sphere  you  will  perceive  at  once  that  the  rich 
suffer  as  severely  as  the  poor. 

Your  theory  for  a  better  distribution  of  worldly 
wealth  may  be  just  and  wise  and  good,  but  where 
are  the  men  who  are  entitled  to  hold  the  scale  of 
justice  for  their  fellow-beings  ?  Drive  away  the  dark 
fog  of  superstition,  through  which  every  comrade 
and  fellow-sufferer  appears  to  you  as  a  dangerous 
foe  with  whom  you  must  fight  forever  for  every 
thing  that  gives  you  pleasure,  then  Love  with  a 
bright  smile  upon  her  face  may  calmly  wipe  out 
many  a  complicated  example  of  "Mine  and  Thine" 
which  now  troubles  your  brain. 

We  want  freedom  in  love  first,  because  it  affords 
a  chance  for  successful  action  and  for  an  immediate 
increase  of  their  happiness  even  to  the  small  num- 
ber of  pioneers;  because  it  will  bring  influential 
comrades  to  the  rank  of  the  libertarians,  who  could 
not  be  gained  through  the  call  for  economic  justice, 
and  last  though  not  least,  we  want  freedom  of  love 
first  because  it  will  inspire  us  with  the  necessary 
courage  and  hopeful  buoyancy  to  fight  the  spirit 
of  Caesar ! 


XXVI. 
The  Propaganda. 


T  HAVE  said  that  we  should  begin  with  the  agita- 
tion  for  freedom  in  love  because  this  sphere 
offers  even  to  the  fe\v  a  chance  for  immediate  ac- 
tion, in  which  the  most  promising  efforts  for  the 
increase  of  our  own  well-being  and  happiness  will 
be  equivalent  to  and  consist  in  the  same  deeds  as 
the  most  beneficient  work  for  the  cause  in  general. 
"Why  this  cannot  be  said  of  the  economic  question 
is  easily  explained.  In  our  economic  relations  (i.  e., 
in  our  efforts  for  the  satisfaction  of  our  material 
wants)  we  are  dependent  upon  an  entire  nation, 
yes,  upon  the  entire  world  and  the  commercial  sys- 
tem now  in  existence.  Hence,  for  any  satisfactory 
improvement  thereof  we  require  a  great  number, 
powerful  enough  to  overthrow  the  existing  system 
or  strong  enough  at  least  to  make  a  somewhat 
fair  bargain  with  the  outside  world.  If  but  a  com- 
paratively small  number  have  agreed  upon  a  better 
system  and  wish  to  act  upon  their  convictions, 
they  will  promptly  find  that  it  is  an  extremely  diffi- 
cult task  to  exclude  themselves  from  this  srand 


—  278  — 

mechanism,  the  existing  system  of  production  and 
exchange,  to  which  we  all  have  become  so  thor- 
oughly accustomed,  and  that  even  a  partial  exclu- 
sion from  it  requires  a  considerable  sacrifice  of  ma- 
terial welfare. 

The  conditions  are  exactly  the  reverse  in  the 
realm  of  love.  Here,  under  the  old  regime,  you 
were  dependent  upon  but  one  human  being,  and 
your  entire  "relations"  (if  you  had  any  whatever) 
referred  only  to  an  extremely  small  circle.  Here 
you  have  nothing  to  lose  and  everything  to  gain. 
Here  the  change  from  the  old  to  the  new  means  a 
transition  from  exclusiveness  to  inclusiveness,  an 
expansion  from  the  most  narrow  inclosures  to  un- 
limited opportunity.  Here  theory  inspires  to  ac- 
tion, conviction  means  deeds.  Suppose  100  men 
and  women  in  a  city  of  100,000  inhabitants  have 
found  themselves  united  in  the  enthusiasm  for  lib- 
erty and  are  unanimously  in  favor  of  a  certain  new 
economic  system.  With  glowing  cheeks  and  spark- 
ling eyes  they  crowd  around  the  "wise  men"  in  their 
midst  and  cry  out :  "Here  we  are,  ready  to  fight  for 
the  noble  cause.  What  shall  we  do?"  What  answer 
can  be  given  them.  Start  a  co-operative  factory? 
A  good  idea,  if  it  were  not  for  the  fact  that  they  be- 
long to  a  dozen  different  branches  of  industry  and 
that  the  entire  available  cash  does  not  amount  to 
|2,000.  Go  west  and  start  a  co-operative  farm? 
An  excellent  idea,  if  it  were  not  for  two  things,  th£ 
trouble  with  "wives  and  sweethearts",  and  home- 
sickness for  the  big  city!  Revolt,  "expropriation"  ? 
A  rather  risky  experiment  for  100  against  100,000r 


—  279  — 

And  so  there  is  nothing  left  but  to  say:  Go  out 
among  your  neighbors  and  friends  and  agitate 
and  when  we  have  a  large  number  on  our  side  we 
will  act.  Many  have  not  the  necessary  eloquence, 
others  become  disappointed  after  the  first  failure, 
but  quite  a  number  heed  the  advice  and  sacrifice 
themselves  to  the  work  of  education.  They  find  a 
great  deal  of  fanaticism  in  their  way,  but  their 
arguments  are  so  strong  that  they  gain  a  comrade 
here  and  there.  They  meet  again,  they  call  the  roll, 
and  lo !  there  are  again  but  100 !  For  every  one 
whom  they  have  gained  one  has  retired  from  the 
field,  disgusted  with  the  eternal  talking  without 
acting,  and  the  "wise  men"  withdraw  despondingly 
into  their  lonely  studies  as  embittered  pessimists, 
who  henceforth  declare  that  the  only  hope  is  in  the 
conditions  becoming  so  unbearable  that  despair 
will  finally  make  the  poor  devils  fight. 

Suppose  now  that  these  100  men  and  women 
had  accepted  the  new  love-ideal  and  resolved  to 
devote  their  first  attention  to  the  propaganda  for 
freedom  in  love.  They  would  then  have  a  hundred 
ways  for  individual  and  united  action. 

Their  first  work  would  consist  in  clearly  de- 
monstrating to  each  other  their  position  towards 
sexual  possession,  the  new  ideal,  and  the  rest,  and 
to  furnish  by  deed  such  absolute  proofs  of  their  full 
emancipation  from  the  old  superstitions  that  a 
general  and  perfect  confidence  would  be  the  result. 
Buoyed  up  by  the  healthy  and  happy  love-life  which 
this  would  assure  them  they  would  eagerly  enter 
into  the  work  of  outside  propaganda.  They  would 


—  280  — 

be  successful  in  this  because  they  could  speak  not 
only  of  the  "golden  time  coining,"  but  could  show 
by  example  immediate  advantage.  Every  one  of 
those  acute  outbreaks  of  agony  of  which  they  heard, 
caused  by  the  old  terrible  sexual  conditions,  would 
receive  prompt  attention  and  they  will  be  able  to 
offer  speedy  relief,  as  in  ninety-nine  out  of  a  hundred 
cases  of  this  kind  the  agony  is  merely  due  to  ghosts 
and  phantoms.  And  they  would  not  lack  occasion 
for  such  truly  "charitable"  work.  In  every  city,  in 
every  village  of  the  land  there  are  youths  who  are 
nearly  driven  to  despair  in  the  labyrinth  involving 
them;  maidens  who  are  hungering  for  love,  but  have 
no  "suitors''  or  are  too  proud  or  too  intelligent  to 
accept  the  only  one  as  a  master;  "fallen  women" 
who  have  not  yet  lost  all  self-respect;  "seduced" 
girls  who  want  to  drown  their  "shame"  in  the  river ; 
unhappy  "marriage-cripples"  who  can  discover  no 
honorable  way  out  of  their  dilemma;  enslaved 
women  who  can  see  nothing  in  their  future  but 
eternal  work,  eternal  misery;  and  deceived  hus- 
bands who  think  that  it  requires  a  flood  of  blood 
to  regain  their  "honor."  As  a  rule  our  free  men  and 
women  would  confine  their  agitation  (for  the  first 
years  at  least)  to  the  ranks  of  the  avowed  Free- 
thinkers, as  it  is  rather  hard  to  consider  two  differ- 
ent worlds  at  the  same  time,  but  in  extremely  sad 
cases  even  the  fanatic  orthodox  may  prefer  the 
solace  in  the  reasoning  of  common  sense  to  the 
useless  prayers  to  his  unmerciful  God.  As  to  the 
economic  question,  our  friends  will  everywhere  be 
confronted  by  it,  and  it  will  be  utterly  impossible 


—  281  — 

to  neglect  it  in  their  propaganda.  They  will  know, 
however,  that  this  question  cannot  be  perfectly 
settled  "between  ourselves''  like  the  love-question, 
but  they  will  also  perceive  more  and  more  that  its 
solution  in  a  large  ''free  society'' will  be  far  simpler 
than  they  had  originally  expected  it  to  be. 

After  a  free  society,  no  matter  how  small,  is 
firmly  established,  it  will  everywhere  find  so  much 
occasion  for  active  propaganda-work  that  any 
further  suggestions  seem  unnecessary  at  present. 
It  is  important,  however,  to  call  attention  to  the 
fact  that  the  greatest,  the  redeeming  action  con- 
sists in  the  establishing  of  the  free  society  itself ,  or, 
more  correctly  speaking,  in  the  emancipating  act 
of  each  individual,  by  which  the  qualification  for 
membership  is  clear! v-  demonstrated.  Society!  Mem- 
bership! that  at  once  brings  the  thought  of  sol- 
emn rites  and  oaths,  parliamentary  organization, 
rules  and  regulations,  constitution  and  by-laws,  and 
duties  of  officers  and  members,  but  ours  is  a  queer 
society ;  it  has  nothing  of  all  this.  By  becoming  a 
member  of  this  society  you  do  not  incur  the  slight- 
est duty  or  obligation,  it  means  neither  more  nor 
less  than  that  the  others  know  you  to  be  a  free 
man,  or  a  free  woman.  To  be  this  you  must  have 
fully  accepted  the  new  love-ideal  and  therefore 
must  be  firmly  resolved  never  to  enter  into  any 
love  or  sexual  contract,  but  must  desire  to  have 
it  understood  that,  whatever  other  contract  or 
agreement  may  bind  you  to  a  certain  man  or 
woman  or  a  number  of  persons,  you  will  never  be 
labeled  as  a  love-possession.  A  simple  declaration 


—  282  — 

to  this  effect  might  seem  sufficient,  but  after  such 
is  given  every  member  will  expect  deeds  as  a  proof, 
and  if  these  do  not  follow  it  will  be  presumed  that 
yours  is  but  a  belief,  not  a  conviction.  It  is  yet  a 
very  new  and  an  extremely  revolutionary  idea  with 
which  \ve  have  to  deal  and  your  firm  conviction 
and  the  perfect  confidence  of  the  others  in  your  full 
emancipation  are  absolutely  necessary  in  order  to 
bring  out  the  benefits  potential  in  a  free  society. 
We  have  heard  too  often  of  a  man  or  women  ridi- 
culing ghosts  one  hour  and  trembling  in  fear  of 
them  the  next,  to  rely  upon  mere  assertions  iu 
such  an  important  matter.  In  what  then  should 
this  great  redeeming,  guaranteeing,  act  consist? 
As  we  all  know  that  the  entire  constraint  in  love 
hinges  upon  the  superstitions  in  regard  to  sexual 
intercourse,  the  thought  will  naturally  present 
itself  that  it  should  consist  in  variety  in  your  sex- 
acts  and  its  proud  and  open  acknowledgment.  I 
will  frankly  admit  that  in  my  German  treatise  I 
asked  for  this  as  the  only  sufficient  proof  of  which 
I  could  conceive  at  the  time.  However,  very  grave 
objections  to  this  plan  have  finally  caused  me  to 
reject  it  altogether.  In  the  first  place,  you  may 
not  desire  any  sexual  intercourse  whatever  or  you 
may  be  temporarily  or  permanently  unfit  for  it 
(remember  that  only  the  superstitious,  non-free 
man  or  woman  would  declare  that  that  disquali- 
fies you  for  love,  and  that  for  a  free  person  you 
may  have,  in  spite  of  this,  an  immense  value  as  a 
greatly  appreciated  and  beloved  comrade  or  lover) 
or  you  may  be  so  constituted  that  only  a  few 


—  283  — 

exceptional  persons  are  able  to  arouse  your  sexual 
desire.  To  these  objections  we  might  still  answer 
that  the  cause  is  grand  and  important  enough  to 
be  worth  some  great  sacrifice,  but  there  are  other 
reasons  which  compel  us  to  reject  the  plan.  It  is 
inconsistent  with  our  declaration  that  we  consider 
it  extremely  vulgar,  unwise,  and  inexpedient  to 
give  any  notice  to  the  public  of  the  fact  that  we 
intend  to  enjoy  or  have  enjoyed  the  sexual  embrace 
of  any  person.  Of  course,  where  such  information 
is  not  given  the  act  would  be  no  demonstration 
whatever,  nor  a  proof,  except  probably  for  a  few 
intimate  friends :  in  fact,  it  would  be  no  more  than 
what  millions  of  men  and  women  have  done  who 
are  very  far  from  being  free.  When  I  arrived  at 
this  conclusion,  I  felt  at  a  loss  for  some  time, 
until  an  idea  struck  me  which  is  so  extremely  sim- 
ple and  such  a  perfect  solution  of  the  question  that 
it  seems  ludicrous  that  I  did  not  think  of  it  before. 
"What  we  should  prove  is  by  no  means  that  we  are 
varietists  in  our  sex -acts,  but  simply  this,  that  we 
deny  the  right  of  any  one  person  or  any  number  of 
persons  to  manage  or  control  our  love-  and  sex-life; 
that  we  have  reached  a  condition  in  which  such 
control  or  supervision  is  utterly  impossible  to 
Church  and  State,  friend  and  foe,  and  to  lover, 
mate,  or  partner  as  well,  and  that  we  are  free  at  all 
times  to  enjoy  any  complement  of  our  own  natures 
in  any  man,  woman,  or  child.  To  prove  this  it  is 
only  necessary  to  provide  the  opportunity  and  to 
show  its  frequent  and  unrestrained  use.  As  stated 
before,  every  free  individual  has  his  or  her  own 


—  284  — 

bed-room.  This  gives  the  opportunity,  the  intel- 
ligent use  ot  which  will  liberate  the  world  from  the 

O 

worst  curse  ever  placed  upon  humankind.  Men 
and  women  will  come  together  for  a  serious,  intel- 
ligent, unprejudiced  discussion  of  the  Love-  and 
Sex-Questions.  After  due  consideration  they  reach 
that  lirm  conviction  which  makes  them  long  for 
action,  and  then  the  importance  of  this  opportu- 
nity will  at  once  impress  itself  upon  their  minds. 
Again  and  again  the  woman  will  use  the  slightest 
pretext  for  a  demonstrating  action  until  she  feels 
that  her  own  emancipation  and  the  confidence  of 
the  members  in  it  are  firmly  established.  That  is,, 
openly  and  as  unconcernedly  as  possible,  witnessed 
by  members  and  outsiders,  she  will  invite  a  sym- 
pathetic man  to  her  bed-room  and  take  due  care 
that  during  the  time  of  the  interview  neither  Mrs. 
Grundy  or  the  purity-crank  nor  her  best  friend  and 
partner  has  any  chance  for  invasion  or  supervi- 
sion. A  very  simple  act — and  yet  it  is  bound  to 
strike  the  death-blow  to  woman's  enslavement  and 
man's  treachery  and  deceit  in  love.  This  with- 
drawal may  cover  any  kind  of  private  interview 
from  a  mere  business  talk  to  the  most  intimate 
physical  union  ;  what  it  is  the  world  does  not  kno\\ 
and  has  no  right  to  know,  and  as  a  demonstration 
of  your  personal  liberty  the  first  extreme  has 
exactly  the  same  value  as  the  last,  seeing  that  you 
had  a  chance  for  either  without  causing  any  differ- 
ence in  your  position  towards  society.  Imagine 
the  disappointment  and  irritation  of  Mrs.  Grundy, 
who,  through  laborious  exertion  and  the  co-opera- 


—  285  — 

tion  of  a  half  a  dozen  hired  girls,  has  finally 
brought  to  light  the  terribly  scandalous  fact  that 
Mrs.  X  entertained  a  gentleman  in  her  bed-room 
from  9  to  11  P.  M.  behind  locked  doors,  and  now 
is  informed  that  that  is  no  secret  whatever,  that 
the  retirement  was  witnessed  by  a  number  of  per- 
sons and  that  it  referred  to  an  interview  with  the 
solicitor  about  an  important,  real-estate  deal !  She 
may  say  that  she  does  not  believe  this,  but  after 
awhile  she  will  be  so  completely  nonplussed  by 
these  "cranky  people''  that  she  will  give  them  up 
and  let  them  alone — or  perceive  the  wisdom  in  the 
"crankiness"  and  do  like\yise.  You  may  feel  very 
much  inclined  to  cause  the  worthy  moralists  such 
a  humiliation  as  often  as  possible,  but  beware  of 
making  it  a  rule  as  that  would  "'incriminate''  you 
whenever  you  could  not  say  "No,"  and  would  again 
constitute  a  means  of  control.  Whenever  you  are 
placed  before  any  tribunal,  be  it  Mrs.  Grundy  & 
Co.,  "moral  reformers,"  or  a  so-called  court  of  jus- 
tice, there  is  but  one  correct  course  of  action :  Ad- 
mit freely  and  openly  the  fact  that  you  have  en- 
joyed the  company  of  a  person  of  the  opposite  sex 
in' a  place  where  you  had  a  chance  for  all  kinds  of 
"awful  deeds,"  and  add  that  you  consider  such 
privacy  your  inalienable  right  (even  the  most  fan- 
atic Comstockian  will  not  dare  dispute  that).  And 
if  the  question  is  asked  whether  the  intercourse 
was  "intimate."  whatever  may  be  the  truth,  an- 
swer neither  "No"  nor  "Yes."  but  always,  "None 
of  your  business!"  Of  course  you  ma.y  choose  a 
little  more  polite  phrase  than  this,  but  be  sure  to 


—  286  -- 

nave  it  sound  just  as  distinct  and  unmistaka- 
ble. 

Another  thing  which  is  necessary  to  make  you 
"free,"  if  you  have  any  sexual  desire  whatever,  is 
that  you  have^a  rational  view  of.the  sex-union  itself 
as  explained  in  another  chapter  of  this  book.  If 
you  still  consider  it  such  a  terribly  sacred  act  that 
one  should  meditate  for  a  year  and  pray  for  a 
month  before  participating  in  it,  or  if  you  should 
hold  to  the  other  extreme  and  regard  it  as  some- 
thing low,  mean,  and  vulgar,  or  be  ashamed  of  it 
because  it  is  "carnal"  —  in  any  case  the  view  con- 
stitutes a  very  serious  -obstruction  to  that  free 
development  and  cheerful  manifestation  of  all  your 
warmest  and  noblest  feelings  towards  your  fellow- 
beings  which  we  desire  to  encourage.  A  free  dis- 
cussion of  the  subject  will  soon  liberate  you  from 
such  morbid  views  and  a  simple  declaration  to 
that  effect  will  be  perfectly  sufficient. 

After  a  number  of  individuals  who  have  the  op- 
portunity for  social  intercourse  Avith  each  other 
have  thus  established  and  proved  their  emancipa- 
tion, the  salutary  influence  upon  the  happiness  of 
every  member  will  promptly  become  apparent.  To 
be  with  them  will  mean  that  you  are  in  a  society 
where  the  barriers  to  love  and  sympathy  have  been 
removed,  where  there  is  no  obstacle  to  hinder  you 
in  the  enjoyment  of  love  except  perhaps  a  lack  of 
attractive  power  in  yourself.  Show  your  worth 
and  you  will  find  some  one  to  appreciate  it ;  look 
for  some  beautiful  complement  of  yourself  in  every 
sympathetic  person  whom  you  meet,  and  you  will 


—  287  - 

find  it.  It  is  an  extremely  easy  matter  to  love,  to 
gain  love,  and  to  enjoy  love,  where  that  does  not 
mean  to  make  a  contract  for  mutual  exclusive 
possession  (body,  soul  and  everything),  and  in 
which  you  must  not  take  all  the  repellent  qualities 
with  the  good  !  The  free  individual  will  say  to  you : 
"Love  and  enjoy  whatever  you  find  love-worthy 
within  me:  others  may  appreciate,  yes,  may  need 
to  complete  a  beautiful  harmony  much  of  me  which 
is  valueless  for  you,  which,  if  forced  upon  y6u, 
would  result  in  nothing  but  shrill  discords. 

The  free  discussion  of  that  most  important 
and  most  interesting  of  all  subjects — love  and  sex- 
life — the  different  propositions  for  effective  propa- 
ganda, the  planning  for  aiding  and  assisting  the 
sufferers  about  us,  will  tend  to  make  our  social 
Intel-course  extremely  interesting.  The  ''piquant 
flavor,"  which  such  subjects  may  have  for  the  mem- 
bers in  the  beginning,  will  of  course  be  gone  very 
soon,  but  you  will  be  repaid  for  that  loss  a  thou- 
sandfold by  genuine  love  and  a  healthy  enjoyment 
of  life. 

The  society  will  be  no  "secret  society"  in  any 
way  whatever.  As  a  society  it  has  nothing  to  hide 
from  the  public,  but  will  ever  invite  investigation. 
It  will  not  be  exclusive,  either.  I  cannot  see  any 
reason  why  it  should  not  heartily  welcome  to  its 
meetings  any  sympathetic  person  who  desires  to 
seriously  study  the  questions  there  canvassed,  even 
if  he  or  she  be  yet  a  tightly  bound  and  a  supersti- 
tious person.  I  feel  pretty  sure  that  the  barriers 
which  such  an  individual  would  of  course  set  around 


—  288  - 

her-  or  himself  would  be  "respected"  fully  as  much 
here  as  in  conventional  society.  We  will  ever  try 
to  convince  by  argument  and  example,  but  the  free 
man  will  be  far  less  likely  to  "seduce"  any  one  than 
the  moralist,  to  whom  it  may  appear  as  the  only 
chance  for  a  satisfactory  gratification  of  his  desire. 
The  latter  often  becomes  a  "seducer"  because  he 
and  his'  partner  do  not  "know  themselves;"  think- 
ing that  the  guard  (their  moral  feeling)  will  be 
strong  enough  to  protect  them  from  "falling, "they 
indulge  a  little  in  that  enticing  game,  "playing 
with  the  fire,"  until,  too  late,  they  find  that  there 
are  moments  when  even  the  severest  moral  train- 
ing is  not  strong  enough  to  guard  them.  The  free 
man  knows  himself  and,  have  he  ever  so  passionate 
a  nature,  he  also  knows  that  no  woman  need  ever 
become  "dangerous"  for  him  if  he  "puts  on  the 
brakes"  in  due  time.  He  will  know  it  is  absolutely 
necessary  to  do  so  when  a  woman  tells  him  that  to 
love  him  means  that  she  wants  him  exclusively  as 
her  love-object.  I  suppose  that  this  appears  "per- 
fectly charming"  to  the  average  enamored  man  of 
to-day,  but  to  a  free  man  such  a  declaration  will 
sound  so  shocking  that  he  will  not  only  respect  the 
limit-lines  of  the  lady  in  question,  but  will  draw  an 
extra  line  around  his  person  for  her.  Let  me  tell 
you,  dear  readers,  that  after  men  and  women  have 
once  fully  realized  the  beauty  of  freedom  they  will 
look  upon  the  old  love-ideal  as  one  of  the  most 
horrible  thoughts  which  ever  entered  into  human 
minds. 

Rather  late  I  think  of  a  point  which  is  of  no 


—  289  — 

little  importance:  We  must  have  some  new  and 
appropriate  names.  The  terms  free  society,  free 
men  and  women,  and  the  others,  will  do  well  enough 
in  a  single  treatise  of  this  kind  where  yon  can  ex- 
plain at  the, beginning  in  what  sense  they  will  be 
employed,  but  for  general  use  they  would  be  in- 
adequate and  misleading.  I  have  racked  my  brains 
to  invent  a  beautiful,  appropriate,  and  suggestive 
terminology,  but  in  vain  :  so  I  have  finally  decided 
to  accept  the  terms,  New-Idealism,  New-Idealist, 
and  XPW- ideal-Society,  seeing  that  it  is  the  accep- 
tance of  the  new  love-ideal  which  demonstrates 
most  distinctly  our  position  towards  the  marriage- 
question.  I  fear  that  some  readers  may  think  that 
it  sounds  rather  silly,  because  the  word  idealist 
means  for  many  about  the  same  as  "vague  illusion- 
ist,''while  we  intend  to  be  extremely  practical,  but, 
having  no  better  terms  at  my  command,  I  will  use 
them  henceforth  in  all  discussions  of  the  subject 
until  an  abler  mind  suggests  more  appropriate 
names. 

As  1  intimated  before,  I  have  complet eh"  changed 
my  opinion  in  regard  to  the  advisability  of  legal 
marriage.  In  my  German  book  I  recommended  it 
in  cases  where  a  couple  have  made  a  comradeship- 
contract  for  life  and  desire  to  establish  a  joint 
home  and  a  family.  I  advised  them  to  choose  the 
simplest  legal  form  and  to  have  it  perfectly  under- 
stood between  themselves  that  this  is  not  to  mean 
any  such  an  absurdity  as  a  love-contract  nor  any 
sexual  agreement  (which  would  mean  a  degrada- 
tion), but  that  it  shall  signify  only  that  part  of 


—  290  — 

the  legal  provisions  which  pertains  to  the  econ- 
omic, as  concerns  mutual  aid  and  assistance,  and 
their  relation  toward  each  other  and  toward  their 
children  in  regard  to  inheritance.  The  statute  laws 
of  course  contain  many  articles  relating  to  the  sex- 
ual contract  involved  in  marriage,  but  not  one  of 
them  can  gain  any  particular  significance  except 
through  the  action  or  suit  of  one  of  the  parties  to 
the  contract,  which  would  be  impossible,  however, 
after  a  mutual  agreement  between  the  parties  ;is 
described  had  been  effected  and  a  cted  u  pon . 
My  reasons  for  such  advice  were  as  follows : 

1.  It  is  the  simplest  manner  of  legalizing  the 
intended  economic  relation  and,  what  is  more  im- 
portant, of  securing  such  right  of  inheritance  for 
each  party  interested  as  would   naturally  be  de- 
sired . 

2.  The  security  thus  obtained  may  strengthen 
the  parties  for  courageous  action. 

3.  The  divorce-laws  would  interest  us  but  very 
little,  as  ninety-nine  per  cent,  of  all  the  reasons 
which  to  the  superstitious  may  make  divorce  ap- 
pear desirable  do  not  exist  in  such  a  union. 

4.  It  need  not  bind  their  freedom  in  love  in 
any  way,  but  may  be  of  use,  especially  in  places 
where  they  stand  entirely  alone,  as  a  partial  means 
of  prevention  of  molestation  and  attack  by  the  su- 
perstitious neighbors. 

My  reasons  for  changing  my  opinion  are  these: 

1.  The  fact  that  this  operation  is  so  extremely 

simple  makes  it  extremely  dangerous.    Any  one  of 

the  economic  relations  which  you  may  desire,  from 


—  291  — 

the  support  of  a  child  to  the  right  of  inheritance, 
can  be  made  equally  binding1  without  the  marriage 
contract.  The  fact  that  the  procedure  is  more  com- 
plicated when  a  separate  contract  or  deed  must  be 
made  for  each  one  of  the  different  relations,  is  not 
a  disadvantage  but  an  advantage.  Each  point  will 
be  specially  considered,  every  agreement  will  be 
made  to  suit  the  particular  circumstances,  and  this 
is  of  great  importance.  If  it  remains  the  rule  to  use 
the  marriage  ceremony  for  the  family  contract,  it 
may  result  in  many  hasty,  inconsiderate  actions 
and  great  injustice. 

2.  The  laws  of  many  states  of  the  Union  still 
place  the  married  woman  at  such  an  unfair  econ- 
omic disadvantage  that  that  is  sufficient  reason 
to  reject  the  marriage  ceremony  under  all  circum- 
stances. 

3.  Separate  contracts  afford  the  same  security, 
and  if  any  mistake  is  found  in  them  later  on  they 
can  be  easily  changed  or  annulled. 

4.  We  have  good  reason  to  hope  in  regard  to 
the  economic  relations  that  the  transition  from 
the  narrow  limits  of  the  family  to  the  comradeship- 
contract  of  the  entire  society  will  be  far  more  rapid 
than  was  formerly  considered  possible.  To  encour- 
age legal  marriage    might    seriously  retard  this 
evolution. 

5.  As  to  your  relation  to  Mrs.  Gruudy  &  Co., 
the  advantages  supposed  to  be  gained  are  more 
imaginary  than  real.  Legal  marriage  will  of  course 
make  your  position  somewhat  easier  in  the  begin- 
ning, but'you  will  have  to  pay  for  it  in  the  end.    If 


—  292  — 

you  use  the  advantages  you  will  not  achieve  your 
full  emancipation,  and  if  you  finally  defy  the  in- 
stitution altogether  (as  you  certainly  will),  you 
will  be  criticized  all  the  more  severely  for  having 
"disgraced"  their  holy  marriage  sacrament.  Con- 
sistent action  is  and  always  will  be  the  most  apt 
to  gain  for  you  the  respect  of  your  opponents. 

This  statement  of  both  positions  gives  the 
reader  a  chance  to  judge  for  himself,  but  I  think 
that  he  will  agree  with  me  that  in  order  to  act  in 
the  most  practical,  the  most  consistent,  and  the 
wisest  manner  we  should  beware,  as  much  as  pos- 
sible, of  any  actions  which  might  be  looked  upon 
as  compromises  indicating  weakness ! 

I  do  not  advise  legal  marriage,  but  I  have  even 
less  to  say  in  favor  of  legal  divorce.  I  oppose  the 
former  farce  because  the  little  advantages  are  not 
worth  the  compromise,  and  I  reject  the  latter  farce 
(which  is  generally  far  more  humiliating  and  far 
more  expensive  than  the  former)  because  in  ninety- 
nine  cases  out  of  a  hundred  it  will  bring  no  advant- 
ages whatever.  This  of  course  refers  only  to  per- 
sons who  have  freed  themselves  from  superstition. 

New-Idealists  who  were  legally  married  before 
they  became  enlightened  will  not  bother  about  the 
divorce  laws.  Their  aim  will  simply  be  to  get  rid  of 
the  "label,"  L  e.,  to  prove  their  emancipation,  and 
that  will  of  course  require  exactly  the  same  a.cts  as 
in  the  case  of  unmarried  persons.  They  will  neglect 
the  parlor  for  some  time  and  fix  up  a  cozy  little 
"boudoir" for  each  of  them,  which  our  poet,  J.  Wm. 
Lloyd,  thus  describes:  "The  palace  and  temple  of 


_  9QH  _ 

—  *7»J 

the  individual ;  the  sanitary  bit  of  solitude  in  which 
he  finds  healthful  balance  against  the  weight  of  so- 
ciety, and  opportunity  to  become  acquainted  with 
himself;  the  studio  in  which  he  worships  his  Ideal 
Self,  chips  and  chisels  his  personality,  and  paints 
himself  on  the  wall — his  eyrie,  his  refuge,  his  repose, 
his  kingdom.  In  other  words,  his  home  is  an  in- 
vention to  benefit  and  develop  himself. — No  matter 
how  much  commerce  and  travel  there  may  be  be- 
tween the  home  of  a  man  and  the  home  of  a  woman, 
— and  I  care  not  how  much — the  two  homes  should 
be  as  separate  as  the  two  physical  individuals.  All 
the  charm,  the  surprise,  the  humor,  the  picturesque- 
ness,  the  progress,  of  life  depend  upon  the  evolu- 
tion, preservation  and  emphasis  of  individualities/' 
This  is  a  part  of  a  dream  of  the  future,  which 
may  thus  be  briefly  outlined  :  Human  society  one 
great  household,  through  the  co-operation  of  free 
individuals,  each  and  every  one  of  whom  has  his 
own  individual,  exclusive  little  home — as  his  eyrie, 
his  refuge,  his  repose,  his  kingdom!  This  accords 
wonderfully  with  my  dreams.  But  how  can  we 
turn  them  into  reality?  Such  co-operation,  in  order 
to  have  any  value  whatever,  must  be  voluntary. 
Does  any  sane  man  hope  that  this  can  ever  be  pos- 
sible under  the  reign  of  the  old  love-ideal?  We  have 
our  little  household  of  one  man  and  one  woman 
and  we  still  feel  that  we  need  it.  Let  us  begin  then 
by  rejecting  at  least  that  horribly  idiotic  idea  that 
these  two  should  be  but  the  halves  of  one  indivi- 
dual, that  "they  twain  shall  be  one  flesh" !  Let  us 
begin  by  making  it  at  least  the  voluntary  co- 


—  294  — 

operation  of  two  spheres,  two  independent  indivi- 
duals ;  let  these  become  thoroughly  permeated  with 
the  grandeur  and  beauty  of  the  New  Ideal  and, 
sooner  and  wider  than  even  our  poet  expects  it, 
the  small  circle  will  expand ! 

After  this  rather  long  digression,  I  will  return 
to  my  subject,  the  newly  enlightened  married 
couple.  The  new  ideas  may  affect  their  relations 
towards  each  other  in  many  ways,  but  they  will 
not  encourage  them  to  seek  legal  divorce.  If  they 
were  fairly  good  comrades  before,  they  will  be 
better  comrades  ever  after.  If  they  used  to  con- 
sider themselves  a  "happy  couple,"  they  will  soon 
say,  "before  this  we  did  not  know  what  true  hap- 
piness was."  If  formerly  they  were  convinced  that 
they  were  "a  bad  match,"  an  "unhappy  couple," 
they  will  find  in  most  cases  that  sexual  freedom 
and  'the  acceptance  of  the  New  Love-Ideal  have 
made  them  excellent  mates.  But  even  in  those 
cases  where  they  still  perceive  that  they  are  not 
adapted  for  partnership,  the  divorce-court  will  be 
about  the  worst  tribunal  to  which  to  appeal  for  n 
settlement  of  their  affairs.  What  they  need  is  not 
divorce  (for  they  do  not  care  to  marry  again)  but 
a  rational  and  practical  rearrangement  of  their 
economic  affairs.  If  they  cannot  settle  this  be- 
tween themselves  (which  is  always  best)  they  will 
certainly  not  call  upon  the  superstitious  legalists 
for  advice  and  verdict,  but  will  choose  judge  and 
jury  from  among  the  friends  in  whose  judgment 
they  have  some  confidence.  Consistent  with  their 
ideal,  they  will  of  course  examine  each  relation  by 


~~~  —  y  o  — ™ ~ 

Itself,  and  generally  they  will  perceive  that  the 
"sore  points"  are  confined  to  one  or  two  ot  them, 
while  in  other  relations  they  are  well  adapted  for 
co-operation  and  a  truly  beautiful  comradeship. 
They  will  dissolve  those  associations  which  are 
detrimental  to  their  happiness  and  remain  united 
in  those  which  are  still  beneficial  or  where  the  dis- 
solution would  not  be  possible  without  causing 
more  suffering  than  benefits  (as  for  example,  the 
united  interest  in  children).  An  immense  amount 
of  misery  is  caused  to-day  by  the  foolish  idea  that, 
when  it  comes  to  the  relations  of  a  man  with  a 
woman,  it  must  always  be  "everything  or  noth- 
ing." 

The  case  will  of  course  be  more  complicated 
and  difficult  where  only  one  of  the  parties  has  be- 
come a  New-Idealist,  while  the  other  has  not  the 
necessary  intelligence  or  the  spiritual  energy  to 
accept  the  progressive  thought.  In  each  and  every 
caseof  this  kind  a  courageous,  open  "declaration of 
independence"  is  the  best  and  wisest  course  of  action, 
while  deceit  is  the  worst  and  the  most  dangerous. 
Under  such  conditions  legal  divorce  might  often 
appear  necessary  and  would  be"  advisable  where  it 
did  not  involve  too  great  a  sacrifice.  The  New- 
Idealist  party  should  always  take  due  care,  how- 
ever, to  have  it  clearly  understood  that  what  he  or 
she  demands  is  simply  emancipation  from  an  ex- 
tremely immoral  and  depraving  contract  and  that 
the  demand  is  not  caused  by  any  desire  to  choose 
another  partner  for  such  a  contract.  And  further- 
more, if  there  are  any  relations  still  existing  be- 


tween  the  couple  in  which  the  association  of  inter- 
ests appears  somewhat  satisfactory,  the  Ne\v-Ideal- 
ist  should  declare  that,  so  far  as  he  or  she  is  con- 
cerned there  need  be  no  separation  of  these  interests, 
if  both  parties  can  co-operate  in  them  as  in  a  part- 
nership of  free  individuals. 

I  trust,  dear  reader,  that  I  have  succeeded  this 
time  in  making  clear  the  meaning  of  the  new  the- 
ory. I  hope  that  you  will  fully  understand  that  it 
does  not  merely  show  you  a  dream  of  a  beautiful 
future  for  your  children  and  grand-children,  but 
that  it  is  meant  for  you,  for  your  happiness. 

If  it  still  seems  to  you  that  the  proposed  ac- 
tions would  be  impossible  to  you,  if  you  persist  in 
the  same  old  "philistine"  way  of  living,  then  you 
have  not  yet  grasped  the  grandeur  and  beauty  of 
the  new  idea..  Whoever  you  may  be,  the  full  per- 
ception of  its  beauty  will  cause  a  great  change  in 
your  life  and  must  inspire  you  with  the  necessary 
pride  and  courage. 

Again  I  say :  Conviction  means  deeds  I  And  the 
deeds  will  mean,  a  fuller,  a  richer  life,  brighter 
hopes,  and  grander,  nobler  aims  I 

If  you  are  still  in  the  bloom  of  youth  it  will  fill 
you  with  a  thousand  beautiful,  happy  dreams  of 
the  future,  dreams  which  are  not  mere  ludicrous 
fantasms  and  delusions,  but  which  may  become 
glorious  actualities  through  vigorous,  persistent . 
high-spirited  endeavor.  And  if  the  snow  is  on  your 
head,  let  me  tell  you  that  the  enthusiasm  of  love  is. 
by  no  means  a  privilege  of  youth  I 

Whether  you  live  in  wealth  and  luxury  or  are 


—  297  — 

very  poor ;  whether  you  are  old  or  young,  hale  and 
healthy  or  diseased  or  crippled ;  a  true  and  faithful 
husband  or  a  pessimistic  single  man ;  a  loving-  and 
loved  wife  or  a  lonely  maiden — whichever  and  what- 
ever you  are,  you  will  then  feel  that  you  have  many 
excellent  qualities,  now  latent  and  idle  for  lack  of 
opportunity  for  activity,  which  could  evoke  beauti- 
ful harmony  and  genuine  joy  if  free  to  find  their 
concordant  complements. 

Ye  poets  of  our  age,  do  you  not  feel  that  your 
most  beautiful  lays  of  love  must  sound  as  bitter 
ironies  in  the  sad  and  dreary  world  of  to-day?  Sing 
to  us  of  the  grandeur  and  beauty  of  the  New  Ideal 
until  every  man  and  woman  feels  that  what  we  are 
striving  for  is  neither  more  nor  less  than  that 
which  inspired  the  noblest  bards  of  all  the  ages, 
the  dream  of  love  freed,  purified,  exalted,  expanded, 
until  it  fills  all  the  world  and  blesses  every  man, 
woman,  and  child ! 

Cheer  up,  all  ye  despondent  souls !  There  is  a 
better  time  coming!  Let  all  the  men  and  women 
who  are  imbued  with  enthusiasm  for  Liberty 
and  whose  hearts  have  not  yet  hardened  to  stone, 
join  us  in  the  noble  cause.  Then  we  will  soon 
create  such  conditions  that  the  lives  of  all  of  the 
loyal  acceptors  of  the  New  Ideal  will  blossom  with 
many  a  blissful  hour  in  which  each  can  truthfully 
say  what  I  feel  now,  being  filled  with  hope  and  joy- 
ous expectation : 

"Oh,  beautiful  world,  I  love  thee! " 


Appendix. 


NOTE5 

and 
COrinENTS  ON  CRITICISMS. 


I. 

Introduction. 


T  HAVE  decided  to  add  to  this  treatise,  without 
any  attempt  at  classification,  a  number  of  short 
articles  dealing-  with  the  criticisms  of  my  German 
book  or  necessitated  by  the  experiences  and  ob- 
servations following  its  publication. 

To  all  those  readers  who  have  become  thor- 
oughly disgusted  by  this  time  as  well  as  to  those 
who  have  remained  indifferent  or  whose  time  is 
very  valuable,  I  would  say :  Stop  here,  as  wha  t  fol- 
lows is  not  absolutely  necessary  for  the  full  under- 
standing of  the  theory. 

To  those,  however,  who  are  deeply  interested 
in  the  new  ideas  but  are  still  wavering  and  unde- 
cided, these  articles  may  be  of  some  little  value. 
They  may  assist  in  dispelling  the  last  mist  of 
doubts  and  fears. 

And  to  those  who  are  imbued  with  enthusiasm 
for  the  cause,  these  comments  and  discussions  may 
give  some  genuine  pleasure  and  perhaps  instruc- 
tion. 


II. 

The  Criticism  of  a  "Leader." 


QUITE  a  large  number  of  periodicals  and  news- 
papers of  this  country  and  Germany  have 
deemed  my  German  treatise  worthy  of  a  ''critique," 
but  the  great  majority  of  them  have  confined  them- 
selves to  comments  upon  the  "descriptive"  or  "de- 
structive" parts,  and  have  simply  alluded  in  a 
few  commending  or  condemnatory  words  to  what 
might  be  called  the  "constructive"  parts.  As  I  have 
intimated  in  the  preface  to  this  treatise,  I  would 
not  be  justified  in  ascribing  this  to  lack  of  interest 
or  of  courage,  but  am  forced  to  admit  that  it  is 
due  to  the  fact  that  I  failed  to  make  myself  under- 
stood. 

Of  the  few  exceptions  to  the  rule,  those  who 
have  endeavored  to  understand  the  principles  un- 
derlying the  new  theory,  it  certainly  cannot  be 
said  that  these  inquirers  have  come  any  nearer  to 
grasping  their  true  meaning.  I  am  not  able,  there- 
fore, to  offer  you  any  translations  of  interesting 
newspaper  discussions.  In  the  beginning  I  did  an- 
swer a  few  of  the  most  aggressive  articles,  but  I 


-  303  — 

soon  grew  tired  of  the  constant  correcting  of  mis- 
understandings. 

I  have  concluded,  however,  to  give  you  a  synop- 
sis of  one  of  the  longest  of  these  latter  critiques  be- 
cause it  gives  such  a  fine  illustration  of  what  ludi- 
crously foolish  things  "wise  men''  will  say  and  write 
when  it  conies  to  the  questions  of  love  and  sexual 
intercourse.  It  appeared  in  "Der  Freidenkerv("The 
Freethinker*')  of  Milwaukee,  Wis.,  and  the  writer 
is  thought  by  many  a  "leader"  in  Free-thought. 

In  the  introduction  he  says  that  many  of  my 
errors  and  shortcomings  must  be  excused  on  ac- 
count of  my  youth,  inexperience,  and  my  lack  of 
knowledge  of  human  nature,  and  that  the  result- 
ing ''naivete''  is  the  one  redeeming  feature  of  the 
book. 

As  I  am  not  very  old  yet  and  have  already  ad- 
mitted so  many  errors  and  shortcomings,  I  cannot 
object  to  this  and  am  forced  to  concede  that  I  am 
not  at  all  qualified  to  be  a  leader. 

I  must  also  admit  that  it  was  extremely  naive 
on  my  part  to  expect  free,  unprejudiced  thinking 
from  a  man,  simply  because  he  called  himself  a 
stanch  Freethinker. 

The  first  "great  hit"  of  the  critique  is  found 
in  this  extraordinary  comment :  "Although  we  do 
not  dispute  the  justifiableness  of  a  moderate  and 
hence  healthy  sensuality,  we  do  not  see  happiness 
only  in  sexual  pleasures  which  know  no  barriers 
and  to  which  all  other  relations  which  now  influ- 
ence happiness  and  unhappiness  would  appear  of 
little  or  no  significance.  If  such  a  view  would  ever 


—  304  — 

prevail  it  would  prove  degrading  instead  of  ennob- 
ling for  humanity,  it  would  mean  a  lowering-  to  the 
plane  of  the  beast,  the  arrest  of  further  progress, 
the  ruin  of  civilization."  Then  follows  an  ap- 
proval of  my  views  in  regard  to  the  education  of 
children,  and  the  statement  that  the  writer  is  also 
in  favor  of  giving  the  children  truthful  information 
in  regard  to  the  sexual  functions  as  soon  as  they 
are  able  to  intelligently  comprehend  the  subject. 
"But,"  he  adds,  "unrestrained  gratification  of  the 
sexual  impulse  is  not  a  command  of  nature.  Gen- 
erally they  are  mere  sensualists  who  wish  to  demon- 
strate the  necessity  of  sexual  intercourse  by  calling 
it  a  'demand  of  nature.' ' 

When  I  read  this  I  thought  to  myself:  Is  this 
stupidity,  blind  fanaticism,  or  is  it  the  sophistry 
of  a  hypocrite?  I  was  "naive"  enough  to  expect  a 
prompt  repudiation  from  the  lips  and  pens  of  my 
Freethought  friends.  And  what  did  I  hear?  "That's 
right !  There's  the  weakness  of  your  theory !  Unre- 
strained sexual  intercourse!  Why,  that's  simply 
horrible!  and  so  on,  ad  nauseam.  For  a  while  I 
asked  myself :  Am  I  insane — or  are  the  minds  of  all 
these  people  so  thoroughly  deranged  that  they 
cannot  see  into  the  simplest  subject?  Trying  to 
solve  this  question,  I  found  that  the  above  excla- 
mations were  caused  by  the  following  wonderful 
logic : 

"They  want  absolute  liberty,  they  want  to 
tear  down  all  the  barriers. 

Hence  they  want  unrestrained  sexual  inter- 
course. 


Unrestrained  sexual  intercourse  means  licen- 
tiousness. 

Licentiousness  is  an  evil. 

Therefore  their  theory  is  an  evil! " 

Two  years  ago  I  would  have  had  nothing  but  a 
hearty  laugh  for  such  trick-logic.  But  since  then 
I  have  grown  older  and  wiser  and  have  lost  a  great 
deal  of  my  naive  confidence  in  the  common  sense 
of  Freethinkers.  Hence  I  will  condescend  to  in- 
vestigate. Suppose  that  I  should  ask  my  worthy 
critic  to  show  me  the  barriers  to  licentiousness  in 
our  present  civilization.  Where  are  they?  He  is  a 
great  believer  in  the  power  of  statute  laws,  so  we 
will  begin  with  these.  I  defy  him  to  show  me  a 
single  paragraph  in  any  statute-book  of  this  great 
Union  which  defines  what  should  constitute  a 
"moderate  and  hence  healthy  sensuality"  or  which 
decrees  a  punishment  for  sexual  excess.  All  they 
say  is  this :  Get  your  license,  then  you  can  have  all 
you  want,  and  if  you  have  no  license  you  shall 
have  none  whatever!  And  how  about  the  moral 
laws?  They  say  the  same.  And  custom?  Well,  it 
is  customary  for  men  to  pay  no  great  attention  to 
these  laws,  that  is,  after  they  have  indulged  in  all 
kinds  of  irregularities  in  their  youth  and  have 
finally  become  smart  enough  to  perceive  that 
secret,  bond  existing  between  all  men,  and  which 
means:  "Do  not  betray  me  and  I  will  not  betray 
you !  *'  And  it  is  further  customary  to  fling  a  few 
females  over  the  barriers,  which  proceeding,  if  it 
does  assure  a  "moderate  and  healthy"  gratifica- 
tion of  their  sensuality  to  the  men,  means  a  rather 


—  306  - 

immoderate  and  unhealthy  indulgence  for  those 
women.  But  we  finally  manage  to  drive  most  of 
them  into  that  wonderful  institution,  marriage. 
Is  that,  then,  a  barrier  to  licentiousness?  If  so,  it 
is  certainly  a  very  queer  one.  You  make  them 
hunger  for  many  months  and  years  for  the  satis- 
faction of  their  natural  impulse,  until  they  have 
finally  settled  the  many  necessary  preliminaries; 
then  you  have  a  great  feast,  give  the  couple  a  bed 
in  which  they  must  henceforth  sleep  together,  tell 
them  that  they  now  belong  to  each  other,  draw 
an  impenetrable  curtain  around  them  and  say; 
Another  couple  saved  from  licentiousness!''  But, 
stop,  there  may  be  some  reason  in  this !  It  may  be 
claimed  that  it  works  somewhat  like  the  Keele}'- 
Cure,  L  £.,  you  give  them  the  craved-for  thing  in 
such  big  doses,  mixed  with  a  little  nauseating  sub- 
stance, that  they  become  so  disgusted  with  it  or 
at  least  so  indifferent  to  it  that  after  a  little  while 
they  are  not  inclined  to  intemperance.  This  would 
do  if  it  were  not  for  the  fact  that  there  is  such  an 
immense  difference  in  human  beings  in  regard  to 
their  sex-natures  that  in  nine  cases  out  of  ten  what 
is  no  more  than  a  ''moderate  and  healthy"  indul- 
gence for  one  of  the  partners  is  a  terrible  excess  for 
the  other.  And  how  about  your  education?  Is 
there  a  single  common  school  in  this  country  in 
which  the  pupils  get  any  idea  whatever  of  what 
could  be  called  a  moderate  and  hence  healthy  sen- 
suality? Or  a  high -school?  Or  a  university  even  ? 
Do  your  parents  give  to  their  grown-up  sons  and 
daughters  the  benefit  of  their  experience  in  this  as 


—  307  — 

In  other  matters?  Do  they  teach  them  how  to  live 
a  healthful  and  happy  sex-life?  And  how  about 
your  physicians  and  reformers  who  make  sexual 
hygiene  their  specialty?  Do  not  great  obstacles 
hinder  them  in  the  study  of  human  sex-life?  If  they 
have  gained  valuable  knowledge;  do  not  many 
barriers  prevent  them  from  imparting  it  to  others? 
And  if  in  spite  of  all  this  the  knowledge  has  reached 
a  human  being  who  needs  it,  will  he  not  find  other 
huge  barriers  confronting  him  and  which  make 
intelligent  action  according  to  his  better  under- 
standing an  impossibility? 

Yes,  there  are  many  barriers,  but  they  are  not 
even  claimed  to  be  barriers  to  licentiousness. 

Yes,  we  do  want  to  tear  down  the  barriers,  but 
they  happen  to  be  dark  walls  which  prevent  healthy 
living  and  which  bar  you  on  all  sides  from  love, 
while  they  conceal  and  protect  a  licentiousness  as 
excessive  and  depraving  as  ever  disgraced  a  human 
society.  Clear  the  field ;  then  liberty  will  remove 
the  causes  of  the  evil  and  secure  the  one  and  only 
restraint — knowledge — which  can  ever  be  of  any  use 
for  this  purpose. 

Any  person  who,  after  considering  these  facts 
in  regard  to  present  "civilization"  and  studying 
the  arguments  in  the  chapter  of  this  book  treating 
of  licentiousness  will  insist  upon  saying  that  sex- 
ual freedom  would  mean  licentiousness,  must  be 
either  an  idiot  or  a  hypocrite. 

The  one  and  only  factor  which  has  ever  been 
piv^tended  to  be  a  barrier  to  sexual  excess,  is  that 
part  of  the  moral  code,  or  rather  of  the  moral  edu- 


—  308  — 

cation,  which  characterizes  the  sex-act  as  nasty, 
dirty,  and  vulgar,  with  the  hope  that  this  may 
prove  an  effectual  discouragement.  Under  the  exist- 
ing marriage-system  this  claim  would  be  so  absurd 
that  even  my  critic  has  clearly  and  unmistakably 
rejected  it. 

After  having  proved  that  nature  does  not  "de- 
maud"  the  gratification  of  the  sexual  impulse  by  a 
quotation  from  an  authority  (which  is  too  silly  to 
require  any  comment)  he  states  that  under  the 
new  theory  woman  would  still  be  less  free  than 
man  because  she  would  always  have  to  fear  the 
consequences,  unless,  of  course  "even  the  school- 
girl should  know  all  about  the  preventive  check." 
I  suppose  this  contingency  appears  so  horrible  to 
him  and  his  followers  that  it  is  perfectly  sufficient 
to  cause  the  rejection  of  the  entire  theory.  A  little 
unprejudiced  thinking  would  soon  convince  them, 
however,  that  this  horror  is  not  founded  upon 
reason  but  is  simply  the  result  of  the  rankest  super- 
stition . 

My  critic  further  says:  "The  entire  book  is 
written  from  the  one-sided  standpoint  of  a  man,  to 
whom  sensuality  appears  as  the  highest  craving 
for  happiness,  which  should  receive  gratification 
by  all  means.  Compared  with  this  highest  enjoy- 
ment, which  of  course  lasts  but  a  few  minutes,  all 
other  things  which  make  life  beautiful  and  give 
value  and  substance  to  it  would  be  deemed  un- 
worthy of  consideration.  The  author  had  to  come 
to  this  conclusion,  the  entire  tendency  of  the  book 
absolutely  demanding  it.  That  in  spite  of  the  un- 


—  309  — 

restrained  sexual  freedom  the  author  wishes  to 
retain  marriage  (for  economic  and  spiritual  co- 
operation and  the  family  relation)  is  an  inconsist- 
ency which  betrays  his  naivete  and  lack  of  know- 
ledge of  human  nature." 

This  insolence  deserves  a  severe  censure.  Again 
and  again  I  have  called  attention  to  the  fact  in 
my  German,  no  less  than  in  this,  treatise,  that  we 
must  strive  for  freedom  in  sexual  relations  because 
that  is  the  pivotal  point  upon  which  the  entire 
constraint  in  love  is  hinging.  Again  and  again  I 
have  said  and  proved  that  sexual  freedom  -\vill 
mean  freedom  in  all  love,  that  there  are  many 
other  things  besides  the  gratification  of  our  phys- 
ical desires  in  which  woman  is  a  beautiful  counter- 
part of  man,  hence  that  there  can  be  love,  yes,  even 
passionate  love,  without  the  desire  for  sexual  in- 
tercourse, and  that  it  is  a  pernicious  custom  which 
makes  sexual  service  or  sexual  submission  the  in- 
evitable duty  resulting  from  any  declaration  of 
love.  But  there  are  some  minds  which  have  become 
so  perverted  and  diseased,  either  through  horrible 
licentiousness  or  through  a  morbid  craving  result- 
ing from  unnatural  constraint,  that  it  is  utterly 
impossible  for  them  to  conceive  of  any  "enjoyment 
of  love"  other  than  the  gratification  of  their  phys- 
ical desires  by  a  submissive  slave.  And,  alas,  my 
critic  has  proved  only  too  clearly  that  he  belongs 
with  these  unfortunate  beings,  for  he  says:  "Mar- 
riage and  unrestrained  sexual  freedom  for  husband 
and  wife,  these  are  two  things  which  exclude  each 
other.  All  that  which  gives  a  charm  to  home 


—  310  — 

and  family  life  would  be  unmercifully  destroyed 
thereby." 

This  means,  if  it  means  anything,  that  any 
true  friendship,  .any  beautiful  comradeship,  any 
truly  beneficient  co-operation  with  a  woman,  would 
be  impossible  to  him  or  at  least  would  lose  all 
charm  for  him  if  the  woman  were  not  his  sexual 
possession.  And  this  man  has  the  audacity  to  call 
me  a  sensualist ! 

He  further  says:  "The  home  would  be  trans- 
formed into  a  dove-house  for  fathers  and  sons, 
mothers  and  daughters." 

If  I  understand  this  aright,  the  writer  wishes 
to  say  that  he  likes  a  quiet  home  and  hates' com- 
pan}r.  But  this  involves  no  difficulty  whatever.  He 
would  have  to  choose  a  partner  who  had  the  same 
desire  and  they  could  then  establish  and  enforce 
the  rule  that  the  parlor,  the  dining-room,  the 
kitchen  and  whatever  other  rooms  might  belong 
to  the  joint  estate,  should  be  reserved  for  the  ex 
elusive  use  of  the  family  or  at  least  that  all  wooing 
and  cooing  should  be  strictly  prohibited  in  these 
apartments.  They  could  further  see  to  it  that 
their  private  rooms  were  so  far  apart  that  the  spe- 
cial guests  of  his  partner  would  not  disturb  the 
serene  quietude  of  his  study.  And  when  the  sons 
and  daughters  were  grown  up  they  could  be  re- 
quested to  have  their  respective  dove-cotes  so  far 
away  that  their  cooing  could  not  possibly  dis- 
turb the  peace  of  the  parents !  I,  for  my  part,  would 
enjoy  it  immensely,  were  my  home  to  become  such 
a  dove-house.  I  would  like  nothing  better  than  to 


—  311  — 

have  my  sons  and  daughters  enjoy  a  great  deal  of 
their  social  intercourse  with  their  friends  in  our 
parlor,  where  I  could  be  among  them  as  much  as  I 
pleased  and  retire  to  my  "eyrie"  Avhenever  the  talk 
became  too  silly  for  a  wise  old  man ;  and  as  to  the 
best  friends  of  my  "best  friend,"  they  would  be  just 
the  ones  whom  I  would  like  to  meet  in  my  home. 
There  is  and  probably  always  will  be  a  great  differ- 
ence in  tastes,  and  a  great  advantage  of  the  New- 
Tdeal-Society  consists  in  the  fact,  that  there  you 
will  arrange  your  home  according  to  your  individ- 
ual taste  and  not  in  deference  to  a  tyrannical  cus- 
tom. We  expect,  of  course,  that  you  will  finally 
prefer  to  have  but  a  little  sanctum  of  your  own 
and  have  the  parlor,  yes,  or  even  the  dining-room, 
a  place  where  all  will  be  welcome,  but  that  is  a  hope 
for  the  future  which  we  do  not  expect  to  realize 
through  any  compulsion,  but  through  the  fervent 
desire  of  free  individuals. 

This  gives  the  reader  another  example  of  the 
disagreeable  results  of  the  mistake  made  by  retain- 
ing the  word  marriage.  If  I  had  not  given  the  critic 
an  opportunit}^  to  use  this  word  for  a  certain  union 
which  still  appears  valuable  to  me,  his  arguments 
would  have  demonstrated  so  plainly  the  vulgarity 
of  the  writer  that  he  would  have  thought  twice  be- 
fore offering  them  to  the  public.  As  it  is,  he  goes  on 
to  comment  upon  my  great  "inconsistency"  in  not 
rejecting  marriage  altogether. 

I  have  rejected  marriage  (as  the  term  is  inter- 
preted now)  and  have  told  him  so  in  good  plain 
German.  The  only  inconsistency  consisted  in  re- 


—  312  — 

taming  a  term  which  ought  to  be  obnoxious  to  us. 
If  the  writer  should  claim  that  it  is  a  contradic- 
tion to  propose  comradeship  unions  and  economic 
agreements  while  rejecting  sexual  contracts,  then  I 
should  be  very  anxious  to  hear  his  reasons  for 
such  an  assertion. 

The  article  concludes  with  the  following  quota- 
tion from  Karl  Heinzen : 

"To  flutter  from  flower  to  flower  until  the 
sweetest  one  is  found  is  possible  only  to  him  who 
is  educated  for  a  butterfly,  and  yet  even  in  this 
fluttering  there  is  an  apparent  inconsistency.  A 
butterfly  nature  does  not  go  out  to  find  the  sweetest 
flower  and  remain  with  her;  a  humane  nature  how- 
ever will  consider  that  flower  the  sweetest  which 
has  gained  its  exclusive  affection  and  admiration. 
But  if  it  finds  itself  disappointed  and  if  the  honey 
becomes  bitter,  it  is  no  more  humane  or  wise,  but 
unnatural  and  foolish,  to  try  to  sweeten  it  by  faith- 
fulness." 

Let  us  boldly  accept  the  simile,  although  it  is 
not  perfectly  appropriate.  We  are  real  butterfly- 
natures!  We  do  not  roam  from  flower  to  flower  in 
order  to  secure  the  sweetest  one  as  all  our  own, 
but,  true  to  our  nature,  we  endeavor  to  draw  some 
honey  from  eveiy  flower  that  blooms  in  the  garden 
of  humanity,  and  we  claim  that  this  brings  more 
happiness  and  less  sorrow  to  the  flowers  as  well  as 
to  the  roamer.  We  may  often  find  a  pretty  rose 
whose  charms  make  her  appear  to  us  the  "sweetest 
of  them  all,"  so  that  temporarily  we  will  be  indif- 


-  313  — 

fereut  to  all  the  others,  but  in  such  a  case  we  will 
not  act  as  you  would  do.  In  your  foolish  greedi- 
ness you  build  a  dark  wall  around  your  rose  to 
save  all  the  nectar,  all  the  fragrance  and  the 
beauty,  for  yourself  forever.  Very  soon  your  flower 
begins  to  pale  and  to  droop.  She  loses  her  fra- 
grance and  her  beauty  because  she  lacks  the  sun- 
shine of  freedom.  But  you  have  made  your  choice! 
Henceforth  all  other  flowers  bloom  in  vain  for  you. 
Coldly  and  indifferently  you  pass  them  by  to  go  to 
your  duty,  your  mate,  your  fate! 

Others  will  transplant  the  rose  into  a  darker, 
lonelier  spot  in  the  garden.  They  will  devote 
themselves  exclusively  to  drawing  nectar  from 
their  cherished  prize.  After  a  while  the  "menu" 
appears  rather  monotonous ;  though  yet  sweet,  it 
has  become  somewhat  sickening,  and  finally  it 
seems  decidedly  bitter.  Then  they  will  leave  the 
rose  and  pay  no  more  attention  to  it  henceforth. 
They  are  ready  for  the  next ! 

Yet  others  will  simply  break  the  rose,  enjoy  its 
fragrance  for  a  few  short  moments,  then  ruthlessly 
throw  it  aside  to  be  crushed  by  the  feet  of  indiffer- 
ent passers-by. 

We  have  become  too  wise  for  either  of  these 
actions.  We  will  enjoy  our  rose  to  our  heart's 
content,  but  we  will  not  try  to  gcrge  ourselves 
with  the  honey  until  it  is  turned  into  bitterness. 
We  may  softly  cover  it  with  our  hands  to  enjoy  its 
full  fragrance  for  a  blissful  moment,  but  every  time 
we  will  quickly  release  it  to  bloom  as  before  in 


—  314  — 

the  brightest  sunshine  and  to  remain  for  us  as  well 
as  for  our  brethren  "a  thing  of  beauty  and  a  joy 
forever."* 


*  The  simile  is  fairly  appropriate  until  it  comes  to  the  New- 
Idealists  The  free  woman  would  probably  like  very  well  to  be 
called  the  ''prettiest  rose,"  but  she  might  object  to  the  simile 
because  it  is  indeed  too  "one-sided"  so  far  as  the  free  enjoyment 
is  concerned. 


III. 

The  Charm  and  Beauty  in  Exclusiveness. 


A  LADY  Mend  writes:  "The  love  of  a  varietist 
would  bring  me  joy,  but  mixed  Avith  pain.  To 
every  gladness  he'd  create  there'd  be  an  added 
bane.  The  roses  he  would  offer  would  be  full  of 
thorns,  and  sting  me  to  the  quick.  It  would  be  the 
inexorable  law;  though  he  might  kindly  lavish  much 
upon  me,  he'd  take  my  peace  of  mind.  And  why? 
Because  I'm  so  constituted  that  when  others  re- 
ceive the  same  the  value  of  the  gift  decreases  for 
me." 

In  my  answer  I  said  that  these  expressions 
reminded  me  of  the  ladies  of  the  "upper  ten"  in 
New  York,  who  become  furious  when  they  find  that 
the  design  of  their  most  precious  piece  of  jewelry  is 
imitated  by  others — it  thereby  loses  its  value — thej7 
want  to  possess  it  all  alone  and  be  envied  for  it, 
too.  I  suppose  I  would  be  justified  "in  denouncing 
both  of  these  feelings  as  the  quintessence  of  selfish 
greed,  as  horribly  ignoble  sentiments,  which  make 
their  possessors  find  their  greatest  pleasure,  not  in 
the  enjoyment  of  the  Beautiful  in  itself,  but  in  the 
envy  of  their  neighbors."  But  I  am  afraid  that 


—  316  — 

that  would  influence  neither  the  actions  of  the  ]Se\v 
York  ladies  nor  the  feelings  of  my  amiable  corres- 
pondent. We  New-Idealists  do  not  ask  self-sacrifice 
or  self-denial  from  any  one,  neither  for  ourselves 
nor  for  the  cause.  So  long  as  my  opponent  is  "so 
constituted"  we  do  not  expect  her  to  do  otherwise 
than  guard  against  the  love  of  the  "varietist"  and 
look  for  the  jewel  that  will  shine  only  for  her.  But 
we  claim  thatthis  is  a  morbid  craving  which  brings 
unhappiness  to  her  and  others  and  of  which  we  will 
try  to  cure  her.  Perceiving  that  she  and  many  of 
her  sisters  and  brethren  are  truly  noble  and  mag- 
nanimous in  every  other  respect,  we  cannot  believe 
that  this  craving  is  caused  only  by  the  ignoble  feel- 
ings of  envy  and  grudging  of  the  happiness  of  their 
fellow-beings,  but  are  confident  that  it  is  the  out- 
growth of  superstition,  from  which  they  can  be 
liberated  as  easily  as  we  are  freed  (who  suffered 
similarly).  We  have  found  the  root  and  cause  of 
the  evil:  An  absurd,  an  impossible,  love-ideal,  set 
betore  every  heart  by  the  entire  literature  of  love 
of  past  and  present  ages.  When  you  read  one  of 
those  millions  of  novels,  you  are  thrilled  with  de- 
light when  you  reach  the  grand  climax — the  meet- 
ing of  the  lovers,  in  which  they  declare  their  pas- 
sion and  find  that  they  are  "everything  to  each 
other!"  And  you  shudder  when  we  tell  you  that  a 
man  may  love  a  dozen  women!  You  promptly 
imagine  that  John  (as  a  varietist)  would  have  said 
to  Mary  on  that  lovely  evening  of  June:  "Remem- 
ber that  I  love  Susan  and  Amy,  Jenny  and  Carrie 
as  much  as  I  love  you/'  Ah,  that  would 


—  817  - 

decrease  the  value,  yes,  it  would  rob  the  occasion 
of  all  its  charm  and  beauty.  No,  no,  you  want  ex- 
el  usiveness  and  must  enjoy  it  forever!  And  the 
kind  novelist  says,  "They  were  happy  forever  after- 
wards." 

Do  you  see  your  great  mistake?  The  longing 
for  exclusiveness  in  the  highest  enjoyment  of  love 
is  a  health}*  and  natural  desire,  but  your  wish  to 
have  this  highest  enjoyment  continue  forever  means 
a  morbid  craving  for  an  impossibility.  It  is  easy 
enough  for  the  author  to  say  that  the  couple  were 
happy  ever  after,  but  he  will  not  dare  to  delineate 
for  you  the  bliss  of  that  memorable  June  evening 
perpetually  continued.  If  he  does  give  you  any  de- 
tails of  that  future  happiness,  they  will  be  of  an 
entirely  different  nature,  they  will  draw  a  picture 
of  a  "quiet  friendship,"  and  it  will  be  a  hard  task 
for  you  to  give  any  valid  reasons  why  this  should 
exclude  Susan,  Jane,  et  al.  And  if  the  author  wishes 
to  enliven  this  serene  quietude  with  an  occasional 
repetition  of  the  bliss  of  the  June  evening,  it  will 
require  extraordinary  circumstances  to  make  them 
appear  plausible.  Your  error  consists  in  confusing 
exclusive  love  with  exclusive  possession.  There  is 
in  reality  but  one  kind  of  genuine,  natural  exclu- 
siveness in  love  and  that  exists  while  the  apprecia- 
tion of  the  beautiful  qualities  found  in  each  other 
fills  the  hearts  of  two  lovers  with  such  intense  ex- 
altation of  joy  that  it  makes  them  for  the  time  be- 
ing oblivious  of  the  entire  outside  world.  If  you 
crave  this  ideal  enjoyment  of  love,  then  I  can  tell 
you  that  the  New  Ideal  Society  would  vastly  in- 


—  318  — 

crease  your  chances  of  obtaining  it.  You  may  enjoy 
many  a  repetition,  but  if  you  ask  for  an  unending- 
continuance  of  such  bliss,  then  I  \vould  say  that  no 
mortal  being  has  ever  enjoyed  it,  and  that  no- 
future  society  can  ever  offer  it  to  you . 

If,  however,  you  crave  an  instrument  which 
shall  be  constantly  at  your  command  for  the  satis- 
faction of  your  love  desires,  go  to  the  followers  of 
the  old  ideal,  but  remember  that  that  means  not 
exclusive  love,  but  simply  exclusive  possession,  an 
exclusi  veness  which  is  absolutely  void  of  any  charm 
or  beauty. 


IV 
Woman  vs.  flan. 


of  the  most  deplorable  features  of  the  so- 
called  Woman's  Rights  Movement  is  the  in- 
tense pleasure  and  satisfaction  so  many  of  these 
reformers  seem  to  find  in  condemning,  not  a  certain 
system  or  a  certain  institution,  not  a  certain  class 
of  human  beings,  but  Man,  the  "brutal  biped  who 
tyrannizes  over  and  tortures  pure  and  noble 
Woman !  "  This  tendency  becomes  most  strikingly 
apparent  in  the  treatment  of  the  subject  of  sex- 
relations  and  love. 

For  some  time,  I  made  the  pleas  of  women  for 
woman's  emancipation  my  special  study.  I  lound 
a  great  deal  of  sound  logic,  plenty  of  irrefutable 
arguments  to  convince  me,  but  I  was  so  thor- 
oughly disgusted  with  these  constant  denuncia- 
tions of  the  masculine  sex,  as  a  whole,  that  I  turned 
with  a  sigh  of  relief  to  a  finely  written  article  in  a 
German  paper  in  which  this  same  tyrannical  incli- 
nation in  love  was  claimed  to  belong  to  the  charac- 
teristics of  the  "Eternal  Womanly,"  and  the  argu- 
ment was  substantiated  by  a  very  significant 
example  from  actual  life.  Let  me.warn  you,  dear 


—  320  — 

ladies:  Every  accusation  of  this  kind  we  can 
promptly  return  with  the  same  justification.  You 
tell  us  of  thousands  of  faithful,  loving  women,  who 
suffer  under  the  tyranny  of  cruel  and  heartless 
men — and  you  are  right — but  can  we  not  show  you 
also  thousands  of  men  whose  happiness  has  been 
destroyed,  whose  lives  have  been  wrecked,  by  being 
enslaved  through  their  love  for  cruel,  tyrannical 
women?  You  tell  us  of  thousands  of  men  who 
have  "seduced"  women  and  "ruined ''them  through 
treachery  and  continued  deceit.  This  is  also  true, 
but  are  there  not  thousands  of  cruel  and  heartless 
coquettes  on  your  side  whose  greatest  pleasure 
consists  in  arousing  the  passion  of  love  in  men  and 
then  turning  aside  with  a  haughty  sneer  for  their 
"carnal  desires?"  You  denounce  men  for  their 
tyrannical  inclinations  and  yet  we  hear  from  your 
own  ranks  of  reformers  the  proimnciamento: 
"Henceforth  woman  shall  be  the  queen  in  the  realm 
of  love."  Ah,  yes,  to  pose  as  a  queen  with  a  score 
of  men  kneeling  at  her  feet,  whom  she  can  kill  with 
a  frown  or  make  willing  tools  by  a  smile — that  is 
indeed  the  ideal  of  many  a  woman ! 

Let  us  stop  these  most  absurd  of  all  ci 
animosities !  Let  us  study  instead  the  causes  of  the 
evil,  and  we  will  soon  find  that  these  depravities 
and  tyrannical  inclinations  belong  neither  to  the 
"eternal  manly"  nor  the  "eternal  womanly.''  and 
that  the  misery  caused  by  them  is  not  due  to  any 
particular  quality  of  either  sex,  but  is  simply  the 
natural  result  of  that  terrible  superstition  which 
says,  "If  thou  truly  lovest  me,  thou  must  forever 


—  321  — 

toe  the  willing  object  for  the  satisfaction  of  my 
love-desires!  " 

I  have  shown  the  pernicious  effects  of  mutual 
possession,  but  I  omitted  to  state  that  this  mutu- 
ality is  very  seldom  a  perfect  one.  In  most  cases 
the  relation  means  master  and  slave,  and  the 
.slave  is  always  the  one  who  loves  most  fervently. 
It  could  not  be  otherwise.  If  a  woman  is  pas- 
sionately in  love  with  a  man,  who  feels  rather 
indifferent  towards  her  but  agrees  to  "live  with 
her''  for  some  practical  reason,  then  the  former's 
lot  is  sure  to  be  humiliation  and  slavery,  whether 
the  relation  be  a  "free  union"  or  a  Catholic  mar- 
riage. If,  on  the  other  hand,  a  man  truly  and  fer- 
vently loves  a  woman,  who  likes  him  well  enough 
to  play  with  him  occasionally,  but  does  not  care 
very  much  to  possess  him,  then  the  man,  in  spite 
of  all  his  masculine  strength  and  power,  will  be 
nothing  but  a  miserable  slave  of  the  woman.  In 
all  such  cases  the  passionate  craving  for  posses- 
sion gives  an  immense  power  to  the  indifferent 
object  of  the  longing.  Generally  this  is  terribly 
misused,  but  where  the  adored  person  is  too  nobly 
magnanimous  to  use  his  or  her  authority  it  may 
happen  that  the  master  suffers  even  more  than  the 
slave. 

I  trust  that  the  reader  will  understand  by  this 
time  that  when  I  speak  of  the  craving  for  posses- 
sion, I  do  not  mean  the  possession  through  sta- 
tute law  (which,  aside  from  the  economic  element 
involved,  is  little  more  than  a  meaningless  farce), 
nor  through  moral  duty  (which  is  far  more  effect- 


—  322  — 

ive),  but  the  craving  for  that  possession  which 
means  vastly  more  than  all  the  rest, "Through  thy 
love  for  me  thou  shalt  be  all  mine  forever!  "  It  is 
this  morbid  craving  for  an  impossibility  which 
drives  millions  of  men  and  women  into  slavery — 
or  insanity. 

Discard  a  foolish  love-ideal ;  then  you-  will  not 
care  to  be  the  master,  and  need  never  fear  to  be 
enslaved  by  love. 

In  our  longing  for  the  satisfaction  of  our 
present  love-desire  and  in  our  endeavors  to  obtain 
it,  we  may  sometimes  appear  to  you  extremely 
humble,  but  it  will  always  be  the  joyfully  rendered 
homage  to  beauty  and  goodness  of  the  hopeful 
wooer — never  the  submissive  servility  of  the  tremb- 
ling would-be  owner! 


V. 
The  Weakness  of  Woman. 


A  YOUNG  woman,  an  enthusiastic  follower  of  the 
Free-Love-Theory,  who  devoted  a  great  deal'of 
time  and  energy  to  the  propaganda  of  the  cause, 
once  met  a  gentleman  who,  after  an  acquaintance 
of  a  few  hours,  proposed  to  marry  her.  She  was 
pleased  with  the  compliment  conferred  upon  her, 
but  of  course  rejected  the  offer  and  explained  with 
a  pleasant  smile  that  she  was  not  inclined  to  mat- 
rimony. Shortly  after  this  she  met  another  gentle- 
man who,  hearing  that  she  claimed  to  be  a  Free- 
Lover,  proposed  to  her  to  spend  the  evening  as  his 
guest  at  a  supper  and  a  concert,  plainly  intimating 
that  the  recreation  might  end  with  sexual  inter- 
course. Shocked  by  this  "terrible  insult  offered  to 
her,"  she  promptly  declared  that  she  was  ''not  of 
that  kind,"  that  "Free  Love  did  not  mean  Free 
Lust,"  and  bitterly  denounced  the  "depraved,  vul- 
gar, carnal  man !'' 

Pondering  over  this  queer  view  of  Free-Lovers, 
I  was  struck  by  the  thought  that  this  little  incident 
plainly  illustrates  the  main  cause  of  woman's  weak- 
ness. 

Suppose  that  a  hundred  average  men  of  pres- 


—  324  — 

ent  society  (they  need  not  be  radicals)  were  asked 
by  a  good  looking  young  woman  to  enjoy  sexual  in- 
tercourse with  her.  Would  anyone  of  them  consider 
that  an  insult?  No,  the  genuine  moralists  among 
them  would  turn  aside  and  chide  her  for  her  immor- 
ality, the  others  would  take  advantage  of  the  favor- 
able offer  and  scorn  the  "impure"  woman  after- 
wards, but  not  a  single  one  of  them  would  ever 
think  of  considering  the  offer  an  insult;  more  or 
less,  every  one  would  feel  it  to  be  a  flattering  com- 
pliment. Now  reverse  the  case  and  suppose  that 
one  hundred  women  (who  may  be  all  radicals)  were 
asked  the  same  question  by  a  good  looking  young- 
man.  Every  one  of  them  would  consider  it  a  ter- 
rible insult,  yes,  would  feel  that  the  mere  fact  of 
the  offer  had  somewhat  degraded  her. 

What  does  this  mean  ?  It  means  that  the  woman 
feels  like  the  faithful  servant  who  is  asked  to  betray 
his  master.  And  the  man  ?  Although  in  reality  he 
may  be  a  very  humble  slave,  he  will  not  admit  it  to 
himself  in  such  a  moment;  he  feels  himself  the 
sovereign  individual  who  can  do  as  he  pleases. 
Hence  he  will  be  pleased  by  the  offer  but  will  con- 
sider it  his  duty  to  lecture  the  woman  for  cheating 
her  present  or  future  owner — or  he  may  not  feel 
called  upon  to  guard  other  people's  servants,  may 
accept  the  offer,  and  despise  thereafter  the  unfaith- 
ful slave. 

.  So  long  as  you  ladies  persist  in  proclaiming 
your  own  servitude  you  will  remain,  in  spite  of  all 
the  legal  and  social  power  which  you  may  gain, 
weak  women  who  need  "protection." 


—  325  — 

There  are  many  places  and  many  gatherings 
to-day  where  it  is  "dangerous"  for  a  woman  to  go 
''unprotected/'  while  they  are  perfectly  safe  for  all 
men.  Do  we  owe  this  to  our  superior  muscular 
strength  ?  No,  the  times  are  past  when  men  relied 
upon  that  for  their  safety.  Do  we  owe  it  to  our 
greater  skill  and  ability?  Certainly  not.  Do  you 
fear  to  be  harmed  or  molested  by  physical  attacks, 
do  you  fear  to  be  robbed  or  murdered  there?  Where 
that  danger  exists  many  men  do  not  dare  to  go 
unprotected. 

You  fear  "insults?"  Any  boy  can  insult  you! 
any  fool  can  deprive  you  by  mere  silly  talk  of  some 
of  that  ''sweet,  untouched  purity"  which  you  de- 
sire to  retain  for  your  future  owner;  any  libertine 
can  hurt  vour  feelings  bv  asking  YOU  to  be  unfaith- 

«/  Cj  *s  O    *- 

ful  to  your  present  masters,  while  we  men  (by  virtue 
of  the  secret  bond  existing  between  us)  feel  as  proud 
lords  who  cannot  be  insulted  by  those  who  (uncon- 
sciously, perhaps)  proclaim  themselves  our  serv- 
ants! 

And  so  we  often  note  the  remarkable  fact  that 
a  fine  specimen  of  womankind,  strong  and  healthy 
in  body  and  mind,  is  protected  by  a  perfect  weak- 
ling of  the  masculine  sex,  or  even  by  a  mere  imita- 
tion of  a  man,  and  that  the  protection  is  not  merely" 
imaginary.  All  men  are  extremely  sensitive  in  hon- 
oring and  respecting  the  property  claims  to  a 
woman,  when  the  real  or  supposed  claimant  is 
present. 

Such  incidents  as  those  related  in  the  beginning 
of  this  chapter  would  turn  out  entirely  differently 


—  326  — 

if  the  woman  were  a  New-Idealist.  The  man  who, 
after  a  few  hours  acquaintance,  should  propose  to 
make  her  his  sexual  possession  for  life  would  receive 
a  rather  haughty  and  severe  answer,  while  the 
second  one,  if  somewhat  agreeable,  would  be  pretty 
sure  of  having  a  gracious  smile  bestowed  upon  him. 
She  might  say  to  him,  of  course:  "Go  to  your 
owner  (or  ''Go  and  find  the  master  whom  you  de- 
serve"), I  do  not  care  for  the  love  of  an  unfaithful 
slave,"  or  she  might  think  with  the  man  of  to-day 
that  it 'was  not  her  duty  to  protect  the  property- 
rights  of  others  and  so  enjoy  what  was  agreeable 
to  her  and  reject  what  did  not  please  her.  Whether 
she  were  inclined  to  reject  or  accept  any  or  all  of 
the  invitations,  she  would  consider  the  offer  a  com- 
pliment which  could  not  possibly  do  her  any  harm. 
and  she  would  be  too  proud  ever  to  consider  it  an 
insult. 

Freed  from  superstition  she  will  feel  safe  wher- 
ever man  is  safe;  she  will  be  neither  a  queen  nor  a 
slave,  but  a  proud,  free,  self-dependent  individual, 
feeling  that,  as  to  worth,  power,  and  opportunities, 
she  is  fully  equal  to  Man. 


VI. 
'Calling  Names." 


A  X  enraged  moralist  gives  vent  to  his  feelings 
in  the  following  manner:  "You  wish  to  turn 
this  world  into  a  great  bawdy-house,  an  immense 
brothel!" 

It  seems  but  natural  to  treat  such  accusations 
as  a  mean  calumny  or  as  an  uncalled-for  insult. 
I  have  found,  however,  that  a  hasty  answer  in 
such  cases  is  decidedly  unwise,  and  I  wish  to  give 
New-Idealists  the  benefit  of  my  experience.  This 
man  may  be  perfectly  right  and  prove  it  to  yon, 
too !  It  all  depends  upon  the  definition  of  the  words 
used,  which  are  far  from  being  self-explanatory. 
A  bawd\'-house  or  brothel  is  a  house  of  prostitu- 
tion. Now,  if  prostitution  is  defined  as  meaning 
sexual  intercourse  outside  of  any  sexual  relation, 
then  we  do  indeed  wish  to  transform  this  world 
into  an  immense  brothel — and  it  will  be  none  the 
worse  for  the  fact  that  Mr.  X.  pleases  to  call  it  by 
that  name. 

You  might  reply  that  no  educated  person 
would  claim  that  prostitution  means  any  such 
thing,  but  I  assure  you  that  this  interpretation  is 


—  328  — 

as  general  as  any  other.  Instead  of  entering  into 
a  useless  linguistic  dispute,  it  is  far  wiser,  far  more 
effective,  to  promptly  accept  your  opponent's  defi- 
nition (whatever  it  may  be)  and  argue  from  that 
viewpoint.  It  is  well,  of  course,  to  finally  add  your 
own  definition. 

Suppose  that  we  should  accept  that  definition 
of  prostitution  which  from  the  noblest  and  loftiest 
point  of  view  is  the  only  correct  one,  7.  e.,  sexual 
intercourse  without  sexual  love.  Then  the  present 
civilized  world  comes  as  near  to  being  an  immense 
brothel  as  we  could  possibly  make  it,  while  we 
intend  to  change  it  into  a  house  of  true  love  and 
genuine  joy. 

The  same  advice  holds  good  in  cases  where  a 
free  woman  is  called  a  "fast  woman,"  courtesanr 
or  a  prostitute.  Suppose  that  she  should  have  the 
courage  to  simply  answer  (to  make  the  matter 
short),  that  she  would  rather  be  a  truly  happy 
prostitute  than  a  miserable  and  unhappj7  "virtu- 
ous woman."  That  would  promptly  force  her 
opponent  to  back  out  and  make  a  fool  of  himself 
(by  calling  for  the  police,  or  the  like),  or  to  come 
down  to  facts! 

Do  not  be  afraid  of  mere  words.  When  your 
opponent,  perceiving  the  weakness  of  his  position, 
begins  "calling  names"  do  not  get  angry,  but  ask 
him  in  as  amiable  a  manner  as  possible  for  a  defi- 
nition, and  you  will  soon  "corner"  him  or  rid 
yourselves  in  the  promptest  and  most  satisfactory 
manner  of  a  useless,  hypocritical  meddler. 


VII. 
Criticisms  of  Socialists  and  Anarchists. 


of  the  first  letters  received  in  answer  to  the 
request  in  my  German  book  read  as  follows : 
"I  am  a  Socialist,  hence  I  perfectly  agree  with  your 
theory  in  general.''  Shortly  after  this  another  one 
said:  "Being  an  Anarchist,  I  agree  with  you  of 
course!"  Many  duplicates  were  received  during  the 
following  months,  especially  of  the  latter  expres- 
sion. Here  was  a  conundrum  for  me!  Anarchists 
have  to  agree  with  me  because  the}'  are  Anarchists 
— and  Socialists  must,  for  once,  agree  with  the  An- 
archists !  Subsequent  correspondence  soon  solved 
the  riddle :  The  theory  of  Free  Love  (/'.  e.,  objection 
to  any  and  all  legal  interference  with  love-  and  sex- 
relations)  has  been  pretty  thoroughly  ventilated 
in  all  modern  languages,  and  as  a  result  the  great 
majority  of  the  radical  reformers  of  all  the  different 
shades  acquiesce  therein  more  or  less.  This  Free 
Love  means  Anarchy  in  love;  hence  every  An- 
archist is  of  course  a  Free-Lover,  and  it  may  be 
added  that  most  Socialists  are  Anarchists  so  far 
as  love-  and  sex-relations  are  concerned.  I  declared 
myself  a  Free-Lover  and  my  book  was  received 


—  330  — 

simply  as  another  addition  to  the  argumentation 
in  behalf  of  this  theory.  It  seems  that  this  pre- 
sumption was  so  firmly  settled  in  the  minds  of  all 
readers  from  the  beginning  that  they  failed  to  per- 
ceive that  in  this  case  a  great  deal  more  was  asked. 
This  is  all  the  more  remarkable  since  the  fact  is 
that  of  the  148  pages  there  were,  all  in  all,  not 
more  than  two  devoted  to  the  subject  of  legal  law 
and  legal  interference.  Yes,  I  stand  for  Anarchy  in 
love,  and  so  do  millions  of  men  and  women  to-day 
(including  all  Anarchists,  many  Socialists,  Pop- 
ulists, Siugle-Taxers  et  al.,  yes,  even  Democrats 
and  Republicans),  but,  alas,  this  fact  does  not 
make  most  of  them  any  less  the  prosaic  philis- 
tines  they  were  before  their  conversion.  The  com- 
paratively few  of  this  class  whom  the  conviction 
has  inspired  to  active  agitation  and  propaganda 
we  will  gladly  welcome  as  co-workers  in  a  noble 
cause,  but  if  any  of  them  tells  me  that  it  is  the 
police  and  the  militia  which  hinders  him  from  being 
free  in  love,  I  must  promptly  avow  that  such  a 
statement  is  an  evidence  of  a  terrible  error.  Of  all 
the  powers  which  enslave  us  in  this  respect,  the 
legal  law  is  the  most  harmless ;  hence,  to  be  free  in 
love  requires  a  great  deal  more  than  Anarchy ! 


VIII. 
Tolstoism. 


editor  of  the  "Freidenker"  is  not  the  only 
person  who  has  called  my  attention  to  the  fact 
that  the  gratification  of  the  sexual  instinct  is  not 
a  "demand  of  nature."  Quite  a  number  of  others 
have  told  me  the  same  and  they  advanced  far  bet- 
ter arguments  in  support  of  their  assertion  than 
the  silly  quotation  from  an  "authority"  that  "con- 
tinence has  not  killed  anybody  yet."  Some  of  these 
persons  claimed  that,  in  my  description  of  the  tri- 
als of  the  youth  of  to-day,  I  have  greatly  over- 
estimated the  evil  effects  of  chastity,  that  the  prac- 
tice of  continence  is  not  nearly  so  difficult  as  I  be- 
lieve it  to  be  and  need  not  have  the  injurious  in- 
fluence which  I  ascribe  to  it.  To  such  remarks,  I 
offer  the  following  answer :  In  the  chapter  criticised 
I  do  not  attempt  to  give  you  a  description  of  what 
might  be,  but  of  what  realty  is  the  condition  to- 
day. I  do  not  need  the  acquiescence  of  an  eminent 
authority  to  prove  to  me  that  mine  are  truthful 
descriptions  of  the  existing  conditions,  because  I 
know  that  they  are  true  from  personal  experience 
and  personal  observations.  In  regard  to  the  pos- 


sibilities,  I  say  this :  To  a  person  who  is  and  always 
has  been  perfectly  "chaste"  in  his  thoughts,  con- 
tinence is  not  so  very  difficult  and  need  not  have 
the  effects  described  in  the  chapter  on  Our  Young 
Men.  In  many  circles  of  present  "civilized''  society 
the  education  (by  parents  and  all  associates)  is 
strictly  consistent  and  quite  effectual  in  the  attempt 
to  retain  perfect  "chastity"  in  the  minds  of  the  girls 
and  as  a  result  we  find  many  truly  "chaste"  women, 
to  whom  continence  is  quite  an  easy  matter  and 
who  do  not  become  conscious  of  any  bodily  or 
mental  inconvenience  resulting  from  it.  For  any 
youth,  however,  who  is  neither  a  weakling  nor  an 
idiot,  such  chastity  in  thoughts  is  utterly  impos- 
sible under  the  existing  circumstances.  It  would  be 
possible  only  in  a  community  where  all  were  united 
in  the  effort  to  discourage  as  much  as  possible  the 
development  of  the  sex-nature  in  the  boys  as  well 
as  in  the  girls  by  scientific  means,  i.  e.,  by  a  con- 
stant and  consistent  ascetic  influence  on  the  minds 
of  the  young.  The  general  teaching  at  present  is 
this :  We  are  taught  that  the  sexual  desire  is  a  low, 
vulgar  and  mean  craving— and  soon  thereafter  we 
learn  that  the  satisfaction  of  this  same  desire  is  the 
crowning  glory,  the  triumph  of  love!  The  woman 
denounces  the  carnal  appetite  of  man — and  yet  it 
is  the  satisfaction  of  this  same  appetite  which 
makes  her  "all  his  own;"  it  is  the  satisfaction  of 
this  "vulgar,  carnal"  appetite  which  she  reserves 
for  her  highest,  her  "purest,"  her  only  love!  From 
earliest  childhood  we  hear  all  around  us  enthusi- 
astic raving  about  the  beautiful  love-union  of  a 


—  333  — 

man  and  a  woman,  and  when  we  come  to  under- 
stand it  we  find  that  it  means— a  union  for  mutual 
sexual  service !  You  preach  continence  to  the  young* 
man — and  ridicule  his  chastity!  You  tell  us  of  the 
noble  and  pure  "spiritual"  love  of  a  happy  couple 
— and  when  we  hear  of  an  "unfaithfulness"  of  either 
party  it  invariably  means — a  breach  of  the  con- 
tract for  exclusive  mutual  sexual  service!  The  same 
woman  who  speaks  with  scorn  and  disdain  of  the 
"sensuality"  of  man  suffers  terrible  agony  when  the 
least  particle  of  the  "sensuality"  of  "her"  man  is  en- 
joyed by  any  other  woman !  Only  a  perfect  fool  or  a 
hypocrite  can  claim  that  such  terrible  inconsisten- 
cies, such  shameful  hypocrisy,  could  ever  be  con- 
ducive to  anything-  good  or  noble  in  human  beings. 
Whatever  your  ideal  may  be  you  must  condemn  the 
present  moral  code.  There  are  but  two  theories 
proposed  for  the  improvement  of  the  present  de- 
plorable conditions,  which  can  lay  any  claim  to 
consistency.  The  one  consists  in  preaching  and 
attempting  to  create  real  chastity  or,  in  other 
words,  in  solving  the  sexual  question  by  removing 
the  cause,  sexual  desire.  The  other  is  sexual  free- 
dom The  great  majority  of  our  so-called  Free- 
thinkers are  yet  in  a  terribly  unsound  and  inde- 
fensible position  in  regard  to  this  question.  They 
thoughtlessly  imitate  the  priest  in  his  praise  and 
glorification  of  chastity,  purity,  etc.,  without  know- 
ing why  they  do  so,  without  realizing  that,  for 
them,  it  cannot  mean  any  more  at  the  utmost 
than  an  arbitrarily-enforced  continence  for  a  cer- 
tain time  or  for  life  (as  chance  may  have  it)  for  the 


—  334  - 

•sake  of  giving  our  rulers  an  opportunity  to  reg- 
ulate our  sex-relations. 

The  famous  Russian,  Count  Leo  Tolstoi,  is  one 
of  the  noblest  advocates  of  the  first  named  theory. 
He  is  intelligent  enough  to  see  the  shameful  hy- 
pocrisy in  our  present  morals  and  he  is  courageous 
enough  to  be  consistent.  He  is  one  of  the  few  honest 
followers  of  Jesus  and  as  such  must  of  course  con- 
sider chastity  as  a 'good  and  beautiful  thing,  perse. 
He  therefore  condemns  as  we  do  the  idea  of  con- 
sidering every  love-union  as  a  sexual  union — he 
condemns  marriage  and  concubinage — but  he  also 
asks  us  to  use  our  utmost  power  to  suppress  that 
"terrible  devil  within  ourselves"  which  drives  us  to 
both,  and  he  asks  our  poets  to  stop  their  pas- 
sionate love-songs,  which  are  so  extremely  liable 
to  arouse  sensual  desires — in  short,  he  asks  all  of 
us  to  be  really,  truly  chaste! 

I  prefer  sexual  freedom,  but  I  wish  to  inform 
my  critics  that  I  do  not  base  my  preference  on  any 
such  arguments  as  that  that  "continence  is  impos- 
sible" or  that  "the  gratification  of  the  sexual 
instinct  is  a  demand  of  nature."  I  prefer  sexual 
freedom  because  it  is  better  in  every  way  for  the 
happiness  of  human  beings  on  earth,  and  because, 
as  a  Freethinker.  I  do  not  have  to  take  into  con- 
sideration a  future  life  in  heaven  or  hell. 


IX. 
A  Paradox. 


TX  the  chapter  on  "The  Old  and  the  New  Ideal" 
you  will  find  these  assertions:  ''The  difficulty  of 
dissolution  is  the  only  point  in  marriage  which 
gives  it  a  certain  value" — and — "The  weak  point 
about  marriage  is  marriage  itself."  My  critic 
objects  to  these  statements,  claiming  that  they 
form  a  "violent  paradox."  He  says:  "If  marriage 
is  an  evil — as  you  assert  and  I  admit — how  can  its 
indissolubility  be  its  one  redeeming  feature?  " 

As  other  readers  may  have  received  the  same 
impression,  I  deem  it  expedient  to  explain. 

I  assert  that  a  sexual  contract  is  an  evil  under 
all  circumstances.  Therefore,  if  marriage  would 
mean  no  more  than  a  contract  for  mutual  sexual 
service,  then  the  foregoing  statements  would  not 
only  be  a  paradox,  but  a  real  absurdity.  But 
marriage  means  far  more;  it  is  a  complex  affair. 
The  sexual  "belonging  together"  may  indeed  be 
termed  the  essential  part  of  marriage,  but  this 
carries  with  it  some  inevitable  attributes,  some 
of  which  I  would  not  call  "evils,"  as  for  example 


—  336  — 

the  true  comradeship  feeling-  and  the  family  rela- 
tion. If  a  man  and  a  woman  enter  into  marriage 
with  the  firm  belief  that  this  is  a  "sacred"'  union 
which  should  be  absolutely  void  of  any  thought  of 
dissolution,  then  they  degrade  thereby  their  future 
sexual  intercourse  to  the  lowest  degree,  but,  in  the 
majority  of  cases,  they  will  also  establish  and 
secure  thereby  a  lasting,  intimate  comradeship 
between  themselves  affording  them  many  advan- 
tages which,  under  existing  circumstances,  are  yet 
of  great  value.  If,  however,  two  human  beings 
enter  into  the  same  kind  of  a  union,  but  with  the 
presumption  that  it  may  be  dissolved  at  any  time 
"by  the  will  of  either  party,"  then  they  will  degrade 
their  sexual  enjoyments  the  same  as  in  a  real 
Christian  marriage  and  will  miss  the  one  and  only 
"redeeming  feature"  of  the  institution,  the  security 
gained  through  the  confidence  in  a  reliable  partner 
and  comrade. 

To  avoid  misunderstanding,  I  must  state  that 
the  foregoing  remarks  have  no  reference  whatever 
to  the  legality  of  marriage.  The  attempt  to  con- 
trol love-contracts  (whether  they  refer  to  a  "be- 
longing together  in  the  realm  of  love"  for  life  or 
only  for  a  limited  time)  by  statute  laws,  which 
means  to  try  to  sustain  them  by  brute  force,  is  a 
disastrous  folly,  which  has  been  exposed  by  many 
intelligent  Free  Lovers.  I  must  again  call  atten- 
tion to  the  fact  that  the  object  of  this  treatise  is 
simply  to  answer  the  question,  how  to  gain  the 
greatest  possible  happiness  in  our  love  and  sex 
life  772  freedom  and — how  to  attain  freedom  in  this 


—  837  — 

sphere  in  the  best  and  quickest  manner.  I  found 
that  of  the  two  unions  mentioned,  the  former,  which 
is  meant  for  life,  affords  far  more  chances  of  happi- 
ness than  the  latter.  But  I  also  found  that  both 
of  these  unions  are  to  be  denounced  as  harmful 
and  inexpedient,  that  the  real  evil  consists  in 
"marriage  itself,"  that  is,  in  that  unnatural  and 
unjustifiable  combination  which  is  bound  either  to 
make  the  comradeship  dependent  upon  the  sexual 
feeling,  or  to  make  the  sexual  intercourse  dependent 
upon  (l purely  spiritual  love"  and  upon  practical 
calculations  on  the  value  of  a  business  partner- 
ship. 

If  it  is  impossible  for  you  to  free  yourselves 
from  the  idea  that  the  only  satisfactory  enjoyment 
of  genuine  love  between  a  man  and  a  woman  is  to 
be  found  in  the  living  together  as  in  Christian 
marriage,  then  there  is  but  one  right  line  of  action 
for  you :  Consider  deeply  and  investigate  carefully 
before  entering  into  such  an  extremeh'  important 
union,  but  when  you  do  enter  into  it,  let  it  be 
meant  for  life,  let  it  be  free  from  any  thought  of  a 
future  "change."  This  will  be  far  better  than  a 
marriage  contract  subject  to  notice  of  withdrawal. 
Do  not  be  deluded  by  the  erroneous  presumption 
that  the  latter  would  secure  your  freedom  in  love. 
Beware  of  the  dangerous  mistake  of  over-estimat- 
ing the  value  of  the  clause  which  says  that  the 
union  may  be  dissolved  "at  any  time  by  the  will  of 
either  partner"  upon  a  "settlement  of  accounts." 
Such  a  dissolution  is  indeed  possible,  but  it  is 
never  possible  without  causing  severe  wounds 


—  338  — 

except  in  cases  where  the  union  means  no  more 
than  a  contract  for  physical  services  (household 
and  sexual  intercourse). 

If,  however,  you  have  freed  yourselves  from 
superstition,  then  you  will  promptly  reject  both 
marriage  for  life  and — marriage  on  trial ! 


X. 
My  Hopes  and  Fears. 


critic  informs  me  that  his  most  serious  ob- 
jection to  my  writing's  is  that  I  "almost  in- 
finitely underrate  the  dangers  attending  a  free  sex- 
ual life."  He  has  received  the  impression  that  I 
consider  it  a  very  easy  matter  to  live  according  to 
the  new  ideas  and  perceives  great  danger  in  my 
unwarranted  ' 'optimism,"  which  he  ascribes  to 
want  of  acquaintance  with  the  power  of  fanat- 
icism in  general  and  the  mob  and  police  in  partic- 
ular. He  warns  me  not  to  expect  "a  sudden  trans- 
formation of  the  face  of  society"  and  claims  that 
many  who  fully  agree  with  me  will  be  hindered  from 
acting  according  to  their  conviction  by  a  thousand 
and  one  things.  It  seems  that  he  was  induced  to 
these  remarks  by  the  following  statements  made 
by  me,  which  he  claims  to  be  contrary  to  truth  : 

1.  The  government  does  not  force  you  to  make 
any  sexual  contract. 

2.  The  government  does  not  bother  about  your 
love-affairs. 

3.  The  government  cannot  control  the  sex-rela- 
tions of  a  New-Idealist,  if  he  or  she  guards  against 


—  340  — 

ever  giving  any  notice  to  the  public  when  he  or  she 
intends  to  add  the  sexual  embrace  to  the  enjoy- 
ment of  love. 

The  first  statement  is  not  only  true,  but  the 
law  goes  even  farther.  It  declares  that  if  any  mar- 
riage contract  (the  only  sexual  contract  which  it 
acknowledges)  is  brought  about  by  the  appliance 
of  phj'Sical  force  or  by  threatening  with  such,  it 
shall  be  null  and  void. 

The  second  statement  is  literally  true.  The 
word  Love  does  not  appear  in  the  statute  books. 
But  the  government  does  bother  about  your  sex- 
relations,  hence,  if  love-affair  and  sex-relation  are 
identical  for  you,  the  above  statement  is  in  fact 
meaningless.  For  the  New-Idealist,  however,  it  will 
have  some  import. 

In  making  these  three  statements  I  wished  to 
call  attention  to  the  fact  that  the  "deeds"  asked 
of  the  New-Idealists  happen  to  be  perfectly  legal,, 
while  for  the  Free-Lover  of  to-day  consistent  action 
means  illegal  action.  The  Free  Lover  enters  into 
sexual  relations  and  sexual  contracts  which  are 
not  meant  for  life  and  which  shall  be  dissoluble 
without  the  intervention  of  the  courts.  He  has 
the  right  to  do  so,  but  that  does  not  change  the 
fact  that  it  is  still  an  illegal  action  subject  to  legal 
punishment.  The  New-Idealist,  however,  declares 
that  he  will  never  enter  into  any  sexual  relation, 
will  make  no  sexual  contract  whatever,  and  the 
statute  law  upholds  him  in  this.  He  will  enter  into 
such  contracts  for  co-operation  with  one  woman  or 
a  number  of  women,  for  a  short  or  a  long  time  as 


—  341  — 

it  may  suit  him  best,  but  will  declare  that  none  of 
these  unions  include  any  kind  of  asexual  belonging 
together  or  a  sexual  contract.  Mrs.  Grundy  may 
think  it  terrible  that  a  man  lives  in  the  same  house 
with  a  woman  whom  he  loves,  associates  all  kinds 
of  spiritual  and  economic  interests  with  her,  engages 
her  as  his  housekeeper,  etc.,  without  "owning"  the 
woman  and  without  occupying  the  same  bed  with 
her, — but  the  statute  law  says  that  he  may  do  so. 
And  furthermore,  the  New-Idealist  has  a  room  to 
which  he  or  she  has  for  the  time  being  an  exclusive 
legal  claim  and  declares  that  he  or  she  will  receive 
therein  as  his  or  her  guest  any  man  or  woman  with 
whom  he  or  she  wishes  to  be  alone,  and  lock  the 
door  and  ''pull  down  the  blinds' 'whenever  that  ap- 
pears expedient.  Mrs.  Grundy  may  say  that  this 
would  be  very  indecent,  yes,  immoral,  but  as  yet 
there  is  no  law  in  any  statute  book  of  the  United 
States  which  forbids  these  actions,  not  even  in  the 
pious  city  of  New  York. 

These  are  the  principles  of  New-Idealism ;  these 
are  the  actions  which  constitute  the  "propaganda 
of  deeds/'  Remember,  dear  reader,  that  to  be  a 
New-Idealist  does  not  require  a  variety  in  sex-life, 
that,  in  fact,  it  does  not  require  any  sexual  inter- 
course whatever.  I  have  said  that  in  freedom  these 
ideas  would  naturally  lead  us  to  a  "variety  in  the 
sex-life  of  almost  every  human  being,''  and  have 
tried  to  prove  to  you  that  we  have  no  reason  to 
dread  this  as  a  calamity,  but,  however  firm  my  be- 
lief, this  is  yet  but  a  supposition  and  certainly  no 
dogmatic  demand. 


—  342  — 

In  the  foregoing-  I  have  shown  you  that  the 
deeds  which  I  ask  and  expect  of  New-Idealists  are 
legal  actions.  But,  although  principle  does  not  de- 
mand sexual  intercourse,  many  of  them  may  think 
that  their  happiness  does  demand  it,  and  there  can 
be  no  doubt  that  any  sexual  enjoyment  by  a  New- 
Idealist  would  be  an  illegal  action  in  most  states 
of  the  Union  (not  in  England).  How  much  this  fact 
shall  influence  them  is  entirely  optional  with  each 
individual,  as  the  law  referring  to  this  is  a  "dead- 
letter-law"  so  far  as  New-Idealists  are  concerned. 
So  long  as  the  statutes  allow  a  woman  to  receive 
a  man  in  her  room  and  to  exclude  outsiders,  a  legal 
control  of  sexual  intercourse  is  absolutely  impos- 
sible unless  the  people,  as  a  rule,  in  one  way  or  an- 
other plainly  indicate  the  fact,  whenever  a  meeting 
is  to  be  a  sexual  association.  This  appeared  so  ob- 
vious to  me  that  I  did  not  expect  any  objection. 
But  my  critic  does  not  agree  to  this  and  to  prove 
the  correctness  of  his  view  lie  calls  my  attention 
to  the  fact  that  in  thousands  of  cases  in  this  coun- 
try women  have  received  severe  legal  punishments 
when  nothing  was  actually  proved  against  them 
except  that  they  had  enjoyed  the  exclusive  com- 
pany of  men  in  their  bedrooms.  It  seems  that  these 
incidents  have  given  my  opponent  the  impression 
that  such  actions  in  themselves  are  punishable  by 
law.  If  so  he  is  seriously  mistaken.  These  women 
were  not  punished  for  the  actions  proved  by  wit- 
nesses, but  these  actions  were  offered  as  "circum- 
stantial evidence"  which  was  considered  sufficient 
to  prove  "beyond  a  reasonable  doubt,"  to  the  sat- 


—  343  — 

isfaction  of  judge  and  jury,  that  an  illicit  sexual 
intercourse  had  taken  place.  I  claim  that  in  most 
cases  there  was  a  valid  reason  for  the  presumption, 
and  I  believe  that  no  more  errors  of  judgment  have 
been  made  in  these  cases,  comparatively,  than  in 
all  other  cases  where  a  conviction  was  reached  by 
"circumstantial  evidence"  only.  Suppose  that  I 
should  happen  to  observe  that  one  of  my  fair 
neighbors  in  this  conservative  little  city  received  a 
man,  who  is  neither  her  husband  nor  any  near 
relative,  in  her  bedroom,  lock  the  door  and  retain 
him  there  from  8  to  11  P.  M.  I  am  afraid  that 
there  would  be  but  very  little  doubt  in  my  mind  as 
to  the  nature  of  the  interview.  Suppose  that  this 
woman  was  brought  before  a  court  to  defend  her- 
self against  the  charge  of  illicit  sex-association.  She 
pleads  ''not  guilty"  and  says  that  the  interview 
was  a  perfectly  "innocent"  meeting  that  had  no 
other  purpose  than  a  private  talk  on  important 
matters.  The  juryman  will  then  argue  thus  to  him- 
self:  ilThis  woman  knows  perfectly  well  that  to  en- 
joy the  company  of  a  man  in  her  bedroom  behind 
locked  doors  from  8  to  11  P.  M.  is  considered  an 
extremely  indecent  and  immoral  action,  that  it 
means  to  sacrifice  her  good  name  and  to  be  os- 
tracised from  "good  society."  And  now  she  wants 
to  make  us  believe  that  she  did  so  just  to  have  a 
private  talk  with  a  certain  man.  She  lies!  What 
motive  could  have  induced  her  to  such  action  ?  No 
other  than  the  desire  to  enjoy  this  man  sexually. 
For  a  private  talk  there  are  plenty  of  less  incrim- 
inating occasions.  Guilty!"  Can  you  deny  that 


—  844  — 

there  is  a  good  deal  of  sound  logical  reasoning  in 
this?  And  do  you  not  perceive  that  such  reasoning 
would  be  absurd  in  the  case  of  a  New-Idealist?  The 
latter  will  not  only  give-  plent}7  of  sound  reasons 
why  she  receives  gentlemen  in  her  room,  but  will 
prove  by  witnesses  that  that  does  not  necessarily 
mean  sexual  intimacy.  Even  the  dullest  of  jurors, 
however  dangerous  and  immoral  he  may  consider 
her  views,  will  have  to  admit  that  there  is  a  great 
deal  of  "reasonable  doubt." 

It  is  due  only  to  a  firmly  established  and  gen- 
erally accepted  social  custom  that  such  "circum- 
stantial evidence"  can  lead  to  conviction  and  that 
a  legal  control  of  sex  associations  is  possible  to 
some  extent.  With  New-Idealists,  after  they  have 
openly  and  clearly  demonstrated  that  they  de- 
nounce the  prevailing  customs  and  that,  in  fact,  it 
is  customary  with  them  to  receive  visitors  of  the 
opposite  sex  in  their  private  apartments  for 
many  different  purposes  besides  sexual  intimacy, 
such  a  legal  control  will  be  utterly  impossible  as 
the  same  evidence  would  prove  nothing  in  their 
case. 

These  facts  regarding  our  position  towards  the 
law  are  of  great  importance  to  us,  but  they  do  not 
make  the  pioneer  work  for  our  revolutionary  idea 
an  easy  matter.  There  are  yet  many  formidable 
enemies  confronting  us  and  this  battle  for  freedom 
in  love  will  require  some  personal  sacrifice  by  every 
one  of  our  comrades.  What  I  wished  to  show  you 
is  that  there  are  no  insurmountable  obstacles  in 
our  way  (as  in  the  case  of  a  small  number  desiring 


an  economic  revolution),  that  w»«  ran  gain  a  de- 
cided victory  even  in  present  society  and  that  this 
victory  will  be  fully  worth  the  sacrifice  to  every 
combatant. 

No,  I  do  not  expect  a  "sudden  transformation 
of  the  face  of  society.''  I  fear  that  my  book  will 
reach  comparatively  but  very  few  of  my  '"fellow 
citizens/'  that  a  great  number  of  its  readers  will 
find  it  impossible  lo  subdue  their  prejudices  suf- 
ficiently to  give  me  a  fair  healing  and  that  the 
"dread  of  the  ghost"  will  seriously  hamper  theo- 
logical reasoning.  And  there  are  others  \vhose 
minds  are  filled  so  completely  with  a  fixed  idea  of 
an  economic  reform  that  they  are  incapable  of 
giving-  serious  attention  to  any  other  subject. 
They  will  say  iu  substance,  after  glancing  over  the 
book  :  "Settle  the  money  question,  then  we  will  be 
all-right  in  our  love-relations!  "  Others  again  will 
listen  to  nothing  but  the  claims  for  the  "rights  of 
the  individual."  They  have  grown  so  extremely 
"sensitive"  on  this  point  that  they  consider  it  an 
attack  on  their  freedom  or  at  least  on  their  "indi- 
viduality" if  you  suggest  to  them  a  change  in  their 
present  mode  of  living.  They  will  say  :  "Let  every 
one  do  as  he  pleases!  Let  the  monogamist  have 
monogamy,  let  the  polygamist  have  polygamy, 
let  the  lovers  belong  to  each  other  exclusively  so 
long  as  they  choose  to  so  belong  to  each  other, 
etc.,  etc.''  I  will  answer:  No.  1  will  not  let  them! 
I  do  not  extend  the  "lateser-faire"  theory  that  far. 
I  will  try  my  best  to  induce  these  people  to  give  up 
llicir  monogamy,  their  polygamy,  their  belonging 


-  846  — 

together!  And  he  will  answer:  "When  you  begin 
to  prescribe  what .people  should  do  and  what  they 
should  not  do,  then  you  are  not  7;7*'/v// enough  for 
ine,  you  are  an  "authoritarian!"  —  and  we  are 
opposed  to  all  authority!!"  These  persons  who 
are  unable  to  discriminate  between  a  proposition 
substantiated  b}<  arguments  and  a  demand  to  be 
enforced  by  law  or  fear  of  physical  punishment  are, 
for  me,  the  most  "hopeless  cases." 

But  I  hope  and  trust  that  I  will  tind  a  few  who 
have  the  necessary  intellectual  power  to  master 
their  superstitions  and  who  will  deem  it  worth 
while  to  devote  some  serious  thought,  not  only  to 
the  subject  of  our  rights,  but  also  to  t  he  question 
of  how  to  use  them  to  attain  the  greatest  possible 
happiness  1  am  convinced  that  these  will  come  to 
the  same  conclusions  which  I  have  readied,  /.  <>., 
that  we  should  not  only  repudiate  legal  and  moral 
ownership,  but  should  try  our  best  to  exterminate 
completely  the  craving  for  possession  for  the  pur- 
pose of  satisfying  love's  desires.  These  few  will 
exert  a  powerful  influence  over  the  entire  society. 
but  the  "transformation"  will  be  a  very  slow  pro- 
cess, especially  in  the  beginning.  Fortunately  we 
do.  not  require  the  majority  to  enjoy  the  benefits  of 
our  enlightenment.  We  cannot  reasonably  expect 
that  a  large  percentage  of  the  present  generation 
will  be  able  to  free  itself  from  superstition,  but 
when  the  little  children  of  to-day  reach  the  age  of 
manhood  or  womanhood  they  will  be  in  a  far 
better  condition  to  receive  the  new  ideas  than  we 
were  at  that  critical  period.  They  will  grow  up  in 


-  347  - 

a  time  of  disquietude,  dissatisfaction,  and  revolu- 
tion and  the  intelligent  ones  (of  the  Freethinkers 
at  least)  will  notice  that  there  are  no  fixed  prin- 
ciples to  rely  upon  in  this  sphere.  Louder  and 
louder  they  hear  the  cry  from  all  sides  that  "Mar- 
riage is  a  Failure!" — the  "free  union''  must  appear 
as  a  dangerous  experiment  which  promises  little  if 
any  relief,— but  the  youthful  heart  will  crave  for 
love.  If,  in  this  dilemma,  they  hear  of  a  few  ad- 
vanced Freethinkers  who  enjoy  everything  that  is 
beautiful  in  love  without  any  desire  of  possession, 
they  will  not  fail  to  perceive  that  this  would  lead 
them  out  of  all  their  troubles.  Watch  the  develop- 
ment of  the  next  generation  and  you  will  perceive 
quite  a  ''transformation  !  " 

My  fondest  hopes,  however,  consist  in  the 
anticipation  that  at  least  a  few  of  the  gifted  writers 
and  the  liberty-loving  poets  of  our  age  may  be 
induced  to  demonstrate  to  the  world — in  nobler 
and  more  impressive  words  than  they  are  at  my 
command — the  value  and  beauty  of  the  XEW 
IDEAL! 


DEAR  READER: 

If  you  have  fcfond  these,  my  propositions, 
worthy  of  serious  study  and  investigation,  I  wish 
to  hear  your  opinion  (whatever  it  may  be)  and 
respectfully  request  you  to  correspond  with  me 
after  a  careful  reading  of  the  entire  treatise. 

All  such  letters  will  be  duly  acknowledged  and 
answered  as  promptly  and  fully  as  my  time  will 
permit. 

I  want  to  further  test  the  strength  of  my 
arguments  in  discussions  with  honest,  well-mean- 
ing opponents  who  are  interested  in  the  subject; 
I  want  to  hear  of  your  doubts  and  fears  and  to 
try  to  dispel  them,  and  T  wish  to  exchange  ideas 
with  enthusiastic  sympathizers  as  to  the  best 
mode  of  action  in  our  "propaganda  of  deeds." 

EMIL  F.  RUEDERUSCH, 

Mayville,  Wisconsin. 


A     000  092  940     6 


